General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsStop Alerting on a Post Just Because You Disagree With It
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by REP (a host of the General Discussion forum).
I've served on several juries lately where it seems the person who alerted just had a disagreement with the original poster in opinion. There were no TOS violations, no insulting of other DUers or using the C-word or N-word. Just opinions by people the person who alerted disagreed with.
Get over yourselves people. Disagreeing with an opinion is not a reason to alert. It's a reason for you to make a valid rebuttal in response to their argument. If you can't do that then don't waste my time alerting as if they did something wrong.
2on2u
(1,843 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)and it's not what alerting is supposed to be for. I agree with you.
(This post will likely get locked because it's more of a Meta thing than GD thing.)
Control-Z
(15,681 posts)this post belongs in Meta. Though I do tend to agree.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)Leave it alone
rustydog
(9,186 posts)we can do it
(12,118 posts)I've also had to serve on another jury for another ridiculous alert. Meanwhile we lose a valuable member over pure meaness
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)However, though, I must say that you're not exactly the best person to be voicing complaints because you yourself made a frivolous alert, as can be seen here:
Really? She's a little fucking kid.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1922360
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
I find it insulting to be called and "asshole" and "sickish." One can disagree with me without that.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:05 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Attacking the words, not the DUer.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Actually, I agree completely with MrSlayer.
Anybody who calls an 8-year-old a 'brat' just because she made a mistake is not only a fucking jerk, but frankly, I think the admins should seriously question if he should even be on this website at all.
Again, my hats off to MrSlayer. You made a very good call here.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: This was over the top uncivil. There are ways to disagree without being abjectly rude.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
And, btw, I was the fourth juror. It was quite understandable see MrSlayer to reply in the fashion that he did. The things you said in that thread are something we'd expect from Michael Savage Republicans, and not Democrats.....I hope you'll learn better(it's not like this kid was terrorizing a candy store or beating up on other kids or something really bad like that.).
This post does not meet the SoP of this Forum (you might try Meta)