Skip to main content

View Diary: I'm sorry my government tortured you, David (146 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  HR'd for namecalling. n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MixedContent

    Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope... --RFK

    by expatjourno on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 03:03:56 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I'm crushed. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fcvaguy, Hillbilly Dem

      bigchin is such a stalwart member in outstanding standing amongst the purities. Next time you bagel me, can you aim a little lower and toward the center, please? Thanks, peaches.

      "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John Lennon

      by trashablanca on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 03:47:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am asking a favor of you. (11+ / 0-)

        Here are guidelines  I am hoping most people who participate in this group will voluntarily accept.  I happen to think that these will be useful in promoting worthwhile discussion anywhere on dailykos, but I am asking people to consider respecting them here.  I am assuming that you are interested in debate which accomplishes something rather than in the cyber-equivalent of fisticuffs in order to determine who dominates.  Here are three of our rules which your remark violates.  Put simply, we are asking that you abide by what the FAQ's refers to as the golden rule--rec or HR the comment rather than the person commenting.

        We will respond to the words people write here, not to who we imagine them to be. We will read comments with as fresh an eye as we can muster, even if we have never before agreed with a word the commenter has written.

        We will disagree with content, not criticize character. We refrain from deducing what certain opinions “prove” about someone’s personality. People are free to have whatever personality they want. We are interested in what they have to say and what they can contribute to developing a culture of mutual respect.

        We will not bring in comments made at other times or in other places in an attempt to discredit someone. If a person says something which is in direct opposition to something she said elsewhere five minutes ago, we will only respond to what she says now. We are not interested in whether any certain individual is internally consistent; we are interested in internal consistency within our diaries and comment sections, within our group as a whole. If a person contradicts himself within a diary, then we will ask for clarity.

        Don't believe everything you think.

        by geomoo on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 04:01:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And I'm asking you to do me (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          trashablanca, geomoo, 2dimeshift

          a favor.

          Sincerely.

          Please review bigchin's recent hiddens, several of them, and then come back here and reconsider your ratings in this thread.

          •  Thank you for requesting with civility. (10+ / 0-)

            I wish I felt comfortable doing you that favor.  I am not being stubborn or dismissing your concerns.  It is that I personally try to follow a principle.  I try to take each comment as a separate entity rather than as an example of what someone says everywhere.  As a matter of principle, a principle stated plainly in the group guidelines I posted, my rec's in this diary are indicative of one thing and one thing only, what has been said in this diary.  As I stated, I did not rec bigchin's comment here for it's content, but in order to offset an abusive HR.

            It is also not my style to take on the burden of reviewing comments from any one particular kossack.  The truth is, I have not once done that.  If bigchin is a troll, then I trust that folks like you will expose that fact sooner or later.  I personally find troll hunting distasteful.  That's just me.

            I'm sorry.

            Is this all happening because bigchin was followed into this diary?  Organizing one's participation through the lens of different users rather than through the lens of different diaries certainly makes for vastly different perspective.

            Don't believe everything you think.

            by geomoo on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 05:17:52 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Some concerns about your view (0+ / 0-)

              I take it you're a TU. As such, you can't abdicate your responsibility to other TUs. Worse, if that is what you choose to do, undermining other TUs by uprating someone who is hell bent on trolling (as can be seen by his record) undermines the entire system.

              •  To prevent me from uprating in my own diary (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                SJerseyIndy, rb137

                All that is required is a civil clear explanation.  What I met with instead--not from you, but from others--was nastiness and sneering.  In fact, even HOS is not grounds for insults.  There are never grounds for insults, an understanding which is actually fundamental to the notion of this very group.  Even the most virulent racist can be dismissed from this site without our ever having to demean ourselves by engaging in insults.  When an HR is combined with nastiness, my justified assumption is that the HR is not being done responsibly.

                I asked that the "golden rule", as expressed in the FAQ I quote below, be honored.  A valid response would have been to explain to me why some people have decided that the one exception to this golden rule is applicable here.  Instead, I met with insults, accusations of being "pompous".

                Over seven hours after this started, someone claimed that the person being HR'd was a legitimate target for HOS.  Okay, now I have something to go on.  I have seen this poster before, and I have a feel for his politics.  I would not be surprised that the HOS designation has more to do with dislike of the content of his expression than with legitimate evidence of trollery.  That is just my guess.  And perhaps he has been disruptive multiple times, still not sufficient grounds for HOS, although I am deeply sympathetic with frustration over that.

                We disagree on what responsibility is conferred on me by TU status.  It should be clear to anyone who has been paying attention that I contribute in my own way to enhancing constructive discourse.  I call on my own strengths and contribute in my own way.  I do think it would be wrong of me to protect a troll by uprating, but if someone has determined a troll, it is up to them to convince me, with civility and respect, that the target is a troll.  I have seen enough false, thinly supported accusations of trollery, and even of HOS, to be legitimately suspicious of such claims.

                The entire tone of this thread was more one of typical scorn rather than one of responsible policing--your comment being a refreshing exception.  I myself was insulted, as were my site rules.  Forgive me for not taking at face value the word of people who behave in that way.

                The exception to the normal troll rating golden rule of "rate the comment, not who makes it" is for people so disruptive to the community that they need to be quickly autobanned. This is a very difficult threshold to reach, and is reserved almost entirely for freepers or other trolls here only to disrupt. "Troll rate on sight" is not intended to be used against anyone but the most obvious and egregious of trolls -- if your definition of obvious and egregious is not the definition used by the rest of the community or by the site administrators, expect your rating ability to be suspended.

                Don't believe everything you think.

                by geomoo on Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 01:46:34 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sorry (0+ / 0-)

                  I strongly disagree with you.

                  I see your actions as supporting a known troll and seriously undermining this community's moderating system because you are sympathetic to this troll's politics. If you want validation beyond my view, you may want to check out this thread where AdamB makes his view on the troll clear:

                  http://www.dailykos.com/...

                  •  "known troll" (3+ / 0-)

                    You set a standard that is impossible to meet.  The way a person becomes a "known troll" is by responsible members determining he is a troll, then informing others of this determination.  No one even attempted to inform me of this until, as I keep saying, seven hours after I and the other person was insulted.  I am not responsible for what I do not know.  Would you make the claim that you know every troll on dailykos?  If you did, I would have to call you a liar.

                    Even if the claim had been made that he is a troll, I have explained the reasons why I would have questioned this statement.  It is NOT my duty to investigate the background of any kossack just because you ask me to.  It is NOT my duty to be aware of every troll.  If you want cooperation from me in getting rid of a troll, then it is YOUR duty to approach me respectfully with evidence, asking me.  Even so, I still enjoy the right to disagree with you.  From what I have seen in the past, I do disagree with your accusations of trollery and other such disruptive behaviors a high percentage of the time.  Likewise with trashablanca.  But I still keep an open mind.  Perhaps bigchin deserves to be kicked off dkos.  I don't know.

                    This extended discussion, btw, has an annoying trait that is common.  While on the surface it takes the form of concern over protecting discourse on dailykos, what it feels like underneath is an insistence on finding me wrong.  In fact, many people, when faced with initial disturbing energy of insults, followed by direct insults to themselves and to things they care about (e.g., group guidelines), would have become angry and reacted with insults themselves.  This would have been quite useful in painting such a person as wrong. ( I have heard it called a banning trap.  Dead threads are especially useful for these, because the greater community is not around to see the baiting behavior, and because it is easier to take statements out of context.)  I happen to be good at exercising restraint, and I am strongly committed to being reasonable.  But that hasn't protected me from spending hours now in a seemingly endless quest to be granted minimally reasonable requests and to avoid being painted as wrong in some way.

                    This is all too typical.  And now, with this latest extension of the conversation, I'll just tell you straight out that I am very angry to be having to defend myself against your criticisms when it is I who have been insulted.

                    If you think my irresponsible behavior (as you see it) as a TU warrants reporting to admin, then please do so.  I'm through defending myself on this.

                    Don't believe everything you think.

                    by geomoo on Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 10:26:41 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  "known troll" [previously posted in wrong place] (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    SJerseyIndy, priceman

                    You set a standard that is impossible to meet.  The way a person becomes a "known troll" is by responsible members determining he is a troll, then informing others of this determination. As the FAQ make clear, it is no small thing to HOS.  No one even attempted to inform me of this until, as I keep saying, seven hours after I and the other person was insulted.  I am not responsible for what I do not know.  Would you make the claim that you know every troll on dailykos?  If you did, I would have to call you a liar.

                    Even if the claim had been made that he is a troll, I have explained the reasons why I would have questioned this statement.  It is NOT my duty to investigate the background of any kossack just because you ask me to.  It is NOT my duty to be aware of every troll.  If you want cooperation from me in getting rid of a troll, then it is YOUR duty to approach me respectfully with evidence, asking me.  Even so, I still enjoy the right to disagree with you.  From what I have seen in the past, I do disagree with your accusations of trollery and other such disruptive behaviors a high percentage of the time.  Likewise with trashablanca.  But I still keep an open mind.  Perhaps bigchin deserves to be kicked off dkos.  I don't know.

                    This extended discussion, btw, has an annoying trait that is common.  While on the surface it takes the form of concern over protecting discourse on dailykos, what it feels like underneath is an insistence on finding me wrong.  In fact, many people, when faced with initial disturbing energy of insults, followed by direct insults to themselves and to things they care about (e.g., group guidelines), would have become angry and reacted with insults themselves.  This would have been quite useful in painting such a person as wrong. ( I have heard it called a banning trap.  Dead threads are especially useful for these, because the greater community is not around to see the baiting behavior, and because it is easier to take statements out of context.)  I happen to be good at exercising restraint, and I am strongly committed to being reasonable.  But that hasn't protected me from spending hours now in a seemingly endless quest to be granted minimally reasonable requests and to avoid being painted as wrong in some way.

                    This is all too typical.  And now, with this latest extension of the conversation, I'll just tell you straight out that I am very angry to be having to defend myself against your criticisms when it is I who have been insulted.

                    If you think my irresponsible behavior (as you see it) as a TU warrants reporting to admin, then please do so.  I'm through defending myself on this.

                    Don't believe everything you think.

                    by geomoo on Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 10:29:15 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No need to defend yourself, geomoo. (5+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Agathena, geomoo, rb137, Lady Libertine, PhilJD

                      I can speak from direct experience, though, of the frustration you are experiencing as a result of feeling as that you've been made to defend yourself from accusations hurled without base... beside twisting of context and mischaracterization.

                      It's happened to me as well, with this exact user.

                      Time and again.

                      You've shown nothing but grace and restraint.

                      Something I myself cannot say the same, as I've given in to the anger and frustration at times.

                      More and Better Democrats

                      by SJerseyIndy on Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 09:33:13 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Thank you for this, SJerseyIndy. nt (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        conchita, SJerseyIndy, rb137

                        Don't believe everything you think.

                        by geomoo on Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 11:07:06 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You're most welcome. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          geomoo

                          I've always known you to be a critical but fair and thoughtful arbiter 'round here, which makes fcvaguy's comments somewhat more bothersome.
                          But the thing I've find when engaging fcva is that as you push-back on the charges hurled against you... they'll tend to be ignored in favor of further and expanding charges, feeding a seemingly never-ending cycle.
                          I've ridden that merry-go-round with fcva a number of times, and I don't see it changing any time soon given he's still at it even with other users.
                          Here's to your patience and ever-intending devotion to remaining civil.
                          You're far better at it than I.

                          More and Better Democrats

                          by SJerseyIndy on Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 11:29:30 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  You are wrong, and I resent the accusation. (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Burned, SJerseyIndy, rb137, Lady Libertine
                    I see your actions as supporting a known troll and seriously undermining this community's moderating system because you are sympathetic to this troll's politics.

                    I have stated more than once that I did not uprate the comment upon first reading it.  I uprated for precisely the reason I stated, which was to counter what I perceived as an abusive HR.  I announced my intention to the person who gave the HR, and I waited for an explanation for the HR before deciding to uprate.  When the explanation was neither creditable, because it was more insult than substance, and was not supported by site rules, then and only then did I uprate the comment.  This obviously is not simply partisan.

                    In effect, you are accusing me of lying.  If you have any evidence that I am lying, the please present it.  If you are just making shit up, then stop.

                    Don't believe everything you think.

                    by geomoo on Fri Feb 18, 2011 at 11:02:41 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Known to whom?? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    rb137, Lady Libertine

                    I know geomoo as a good writer who makes contributions to this site.

                    That's why I "follow" him.

                    This above all: to thine own self be true...-WS

                    by Agathena on Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 10:05:15 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Wait a sec. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                rb137

                You're saying we have some kind of duty to hide rate someone, on your say-so, just because you have TU status?

                And if we, in our own judgment, feel that the comment in question is not hide-rate-worthy -- if we instead respect the group's standard that we rate the comment, and not the commenter, and if we feel that a particular HR is undeserved and we choose to uprate accordingly -- then you're entitled to hijack this diary?

                Am I understanding you correctly?

                ‎"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." -- Anatole France

                by Mehitabel9 on Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 07:50:36 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Those are idiotic rules. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          trashablanca

          bigchin is a dipshit troll who has dozens of hidden spammed comments and only survives because of the idiot enablers who uprate him.  The asshole should have been banned a long time ago.;

          I am sure I will be hr'd for "calling him names" by the very same people who uprate the piece of shit but I honestly don't care. It will just further prove how assinine your rules are.

          I was Rambo in the disco/ I was shootin' to the beat/ When they burned me in effigy My vacation was complete. Neil Young

          by Mike S on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 05:18:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  In my universe . . . (11+ / 0-)

            ... your comment, which has nothing to do with this diary, underlines the wisdom of these rules.  I am interested in discussing a certain topic.  I take no interest in hunting trolls.  There are plenty of others obsessed with troll hunting--I'll leave the task to them.

            If the goal is to protect discourse, then please consider this:  bigchin's comment occupies 4 inches on my monitor.  The brouhaha in response to it has reached 45 inches, not counting this comment.  Which is more disruptive to discourse, the brief comment of the putative troll, or the seemingly endless railing in response to the comment?  Bigchin's comment had exactly one uprate when this started, it now has six.

            Perhaps you should consider whether your strategy is accomplishing what you hope it will.  You are, of course, free to blame others for the fact that bigchin is still around to stick in your craw.  But, no matter how much you rail against "enablers", you cannot control what others do.

            Simply from observing this thread, it is obvious that your behavior is much more disruptive to discourse than bigchin's one comment was.  I refuse to take responsibility for what bigchin has said anywhere else.  Even more vehemently, I refuse to take responsibility for judging bigchin's character.

            Insulting the guidelines of this group is far, far more offensive than bigchin's expressing an opinion which he has every right to express, and which relates to the topic of this diary.

            One is left to wonder whether the purpose of all this passionate troll hunting has more to do with disrupting respectful discourse than with protecting it.  Your insults and inflammatory tone do not distinguish you as a champion of constructive debate.

            Don't believe everything you think.

            by geomoo on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 05:56:27 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site