The rightwing pitbulls were none too pleased to find that I was, in their words, "trying to bring the rain" to their tiny freeper site.
Actually, real dialogue between rw and progressives is good, if only to sharpen thinking and expression (but not following troll 'advice' in most instances).
So a DUer, "Lumberjack Jeff" shows up, and they are at least at first, and it appears, though it took some extra effort on LJs part, still maintaining their relatively best behavior with him. They probably figure that if they try to go after someone with LOTS of posts who specifically came from DU, they would get into a losing fight (the mentality of all bullies)
So then one of the posters THREATENS me, to attack my ISP, as has been reported below to progressives (see Harpy's post) in many venues
Here's a cc of the threat issue:
Here's an interesting political situation.
Many DUers have found that at many sites, including places for people with medical problems to have a support group, or non-political sites where people raise issues of a progressive nature, what I term 'pit bull trolls' drive them away, thus tending to ghettoize progressives.
Here, from a group of such (who complain bitterly about how DU excludes overt rightwingers, but who were able to find a posting of mine here within 20 minutes without my having mentioned it) comes from one a threat.
Here's the URL citation:
http://www.nationalledger.com/news/unmod/index.cgi?fram... ;read=1151
And here is the threat. Note that this is a pretty clear cut case of a pattern of anyone expressing liberal views being trashed, and worse. Then when one DUer showed up, and they knew it was as a result of a posting of mine here, which they had reprinted and said "cloudy is trying to bring the rain", they have been on their best behavior with the one DUer who showed up, unlike with anyone epxressing progressive views up until then. (This is a practice common within left circles of copperheads -- they will create an artificial contrasting case to suggest that the target of their attack, and not they are the problem. This happens on WBAI all the time.)
But here is the threat, verbatim, which I emailed to the site managers. Since National Ledger is rightwing themselves, I doubt that they'll care, but who knows?:
" ...
Go back to the DU and brag about how you came, you saw, yada..yada..
Now.. if you would really like to see my skills behind the keyboard I'll be happy to show you much more than finding your vapid postings at the DU.
That's not a threat by the way (since threats are against the rules) it's a promise.
By the way.. Just an FYI.. AOL is not the most secure ISP on the planet. "
-----------------------------------------------------
OK, so I reported it to the site managers. I'm sorry I didn't keep a cc of the original letter, but it was polite, and warned them of the general problem.
Next thing I know, although others are posting comments in response to mine, or about me, when I try to post it persistently says "Site closed". Hmmmmm.
So I sent them an email. Here's a c/c:
Is the forum closed or just to me? Since I have seen it closed, new comments have been posted, including in reactions, unfair in my view to be sure, to my comments.
I would make the following assertions, sometimes summarized in my posts:
1) I began in a spirit of complete civility. Throughout I have conducted myself always with at least greater civility than those who were flaming me. Just because I brought this matter to your attention, when one of these particularly mean people then chose to threaten me, I think it is wrong to ban the victim as well. My first postings were since May 10 so it wouldn't be too hard to research if you cared.
2) I am reporting to you not just an individual problem. I have seen a pattern, indeed one of my postings discusses it as widespread throughout the web (you might check that posting out) where progressives get driven by such practices as a pattern from "mixed" websites such as this, by rightwingers. I am not aware of any instance, although there may be some, of similar patterns of progressives hounding rightwingers.
(I do not refer to people responding at least to some degree, to meanness with sharpness of their own). I have noticed a number of other progressive voices treated uncivilly as a pattern at the site, indeed even where they were bending over backwards to be friendly and civil. You might look at the (as of now) one thread started by self-consciously civil Lumberjack Jeff and the response he got -- and in his case alone the rightwing flamers were being on their BEST behavior. Those RWs engaged in this practice are still free to post.
3) You really should dialogue with ANYONE that you ban. In this instance, the tendency is for anyone who isn't RW to be driven from the site. I have never tried nor ever done anything that would tend to drive anyone from the site, and your pattern of punishing the victim as well as maybe (one of) the perpetrators clearly would indicate a desire similar to the flamers to discourage "squealers" and have a relatively homogenous RW site.
---------------------------------------------
NOW I KNOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD SAY -- WHO gives a flying f*** about this two-bit site? But then, who cares if some little town discriminates on the basis of race? or whatever? The point is that we are dealing with a web-wide problem, and the issue here has been joined. I am sure there are other sites where this could just as easily be done if this is not considered an ideal venue. But it's good to test out skills and strategies in less important venues before going on to the more important ones. I would be interested in both advice, and especially in individuals who are interested in trying to address the problem in this particular case.
I think this problem of pit-bull trolls is a major one, that involves no less than the ghettoization of progressives in discussion sites on the web. I think that a list of major arenae for serious discussion should be developed, and more done about it.