Why is DU's popularity waning? (Title edited, explanation within.)

[ChisolmTrailDem]

Last edited Wed Dec 3, 2014, 03:33 PM - Edit history (2)

What do you think is causing DU to slip further and further away from the days when it was a powerhouse?

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/democraticunderground.com



What happened in August/September that caused that downward trend in site popularity (edited from participation)?


EDIT: I changed the thread title from "Why is DU dying?" to "Why is DU's popularity waning?" because I misread the graph at first as traffic volume, not popularity as measured compared to other websites (scroll down Alexa page to view).

Thanks to ret5hd and dumbcat for pointing this out.

[milwaukeelib33]

1. Discussionist? nt

[TeeYiYi]

164. +1 ..nt

TYY

[uhnope]

276. letting Putin-supporting RWers run wild isn't helping. nt

[grahamhgreen]

378. Or letting pro-war everywhere sycophants cry havoc.

[woo me with science]

480. +1

[karynnj]

552. I disagree to both letting both these extremes post is responsible

In the first place, during recent years, foreign policy has only rarely had more than 10% of the posts - and it is unusually below that. There are times - like when bombing Syria was discussed - when foreign policy did drive DU. It is interesting that the development of the coalition to fight ISIS did not generate the same level of discussion -- nor I think did the earlier leaving Iraq.

What is odd here is that DU has always favored "politics" over policy. (Try posting a live blog of the foreign relations or armed services committee - even with friends planning to watch, it was hard to keep it on the first page that the people I knew posted it in the JK . I have often found good articles that others post on foreign policy, but usually on threads that never get more than about 10 responses. ) You would have thought the 2014 elections could have driven the posts up -- not down. (It does not seem that the reason was people devoting themselves to GOTV in 2014! )

I wonder if Obama"s coalition against ISIS has itself been something that has made DU slow down. Unlike when Bush attacked Iraq and almost anyone here was very likely adamantly against it, this is different. First of all, some of us trust Obama. More importantly, this is most of the world agreeing that ISIS has to be stopped. It also is so nuanced and so complicated, that tuning out is easy. (Not to mention, what is the alternative?)

In that time frame, there were people who posted that many of the Democratic fund raising letters -- speaking of doom used fear to try to raise money. I wonder if the election results, these letters and the volume of DU posts all reflect some kind of exhaustion. It is often said that the party that shows more enthusiasm, excitement, motivation and purpose will win. After the election, Howard Dean made an insightful comment that the Republicans ran against Obama -- and many Democrats argued they were not Obama. Jon Steward had a brilliant after the election piece - listing all the accomplishments Obama had -- then saying the Republicans must have done this by winning the election because otherwise the Democrats would have spoken of it. (both paraphrases - apologies if wrong).


The other thing - and again many here warned of it - was that a large part of the party was already more focused on 2016. The media drove this, so I have not blaming any potential candidates for this.

What I do blame Hillary Clinton and Leon Pannetta for is that they opted to attack Obama on Syria and leaving Iraq - with Hillary going beyond what she wrote in her book and even saying that Obama's choices could have led to ISIS. If she really thinks this, she could have had that interview with Goldberg in mid November. There was no time sensitivity. The same with Pannetta - he could have waited to put out his book. I think what those things did was to amplify the Republican meme that Republicans keep us safe - and polling shows that Obama near that time lost the edge on that in polls.

One would expect that we should be entering the preprimary and primary periods that I think were among the most lively in the past. I suspect that Hillary dominating the primaries to the degree that people are already attacking ANY criticism as against "our likely nominee" has made this time period less lively than either 2004 or 2008.

[NanceGreggs]

342. Discussionist launched in May 2014 ...

... DU's numbers started to take a nosedive in late August/early September.

I doubt that a large number of DUers suddenly decided to switch to Discussionist all within the same twelve-week period between early September and today.

[grasswire]

432. it's important to look at the other factors

At the same time, freerepublic took a nose dive, too. When we delve into the demographics, we find that the sites losing ground are those mostly used by users posting from school. And DU is one of those. Democratic-leaning sites that are gaining ground are those with more people NOT posting from school or work and perhaps fewer trolls or agitators.

[ret5hd]

2. Why are the Y-Axis numbers greater at the bottom.

That's not the way most charts are done.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

3. It's not greater. You just can't see the decimal point. <--- I was wrong here. See post #22 nt

[dumbcat]

11. Where are the decimal points?

I still don't see where it makes sense.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

22. You're right. Something doesn't look right if you look at it as traffic volume. The graph is

measuring site popularity against other sites. According to the graph, DU is definitely losing popularity but it's not showing traffic volume, as I had initially read it.

Thanks for the heads-up on my oversight. The graph is showing that DU is not as popular as it used to be when measured against other sites (scroll down Alexa page to view).

Anyway, this is why I posted, because either way it looks like DU is declining. If it's declining in popularity, then traffic must also be declining or else the sites it is measured against are getting more popular.

[truedelphi]

154. Go through the Greatest Threads today -

Read an explanation from a DU member about how he is being royally shafted by the ACA.

Then read the countless comments of people who are in better situation financially. Any sympathy offered to him? Not from the more affluent. Rather than sympathy, he is told about his being a bad Democrat, bad this, bad that, and obviously, he wants to bring down the Presidency...

DU is a great place for the affluent. Not so great for the working class. And in that way,the DU website represents the very aspect of the Democratic Party that is losing it at the polls.

Or as a member of the public put it to me when I was tabling at a local strip mall, on a local issue, "I realized the game was rigged against us working stiffs when they came up with that meme: 'Vote for the lesser of the two evils.' "

[Autumn]

338. Yeah, that was a "let them eat cake" OP.

Seeing that a lot here on DU.

[QC]

352. +1

[Mojorabbit]

445. +1000 nt

[Fumesucker]

473. Unless you are invited to salons with Hillary Clinton your opinion doesn't count

Because you have no idea what's going on in the real world.

[truedelphi]

530. Well ya gottta admit it -

She does visit some pretty cool salons.

They'd be cooler if you and I could go, but still!

[davidpdx]

475. Not to nickpick, but...

What do you consider affluent?

(affluent is a group having a great deal of money; wealthy.)

How much (what percentage) of DU would you guess is affluent?

Granted I've seen a few posts about people bragging that they give large amounts of money to campaigns (no names mentioned), but I have to wonder how many here on DU are really THAT well off.

I think you are generalizing the posts of a few to the larger group here at DU.

[truedelphi]

529. I judge a person to be affluent if after another DU'er explains

that they are a grown adult living on their own, making less than 17K a year, and another DU'er chides them for complaining about not being able to afford the $ 53 a month that they need for the ACA. Why it is easy as pie to come up with tha small amount of money, is the attitude.

Anyone here who doesn't understand if you are a grown adult living on your own - less than 17K a year means you are living at a minus $ 200 a month situation. So someone else saying how easy it is for them to afford the $ 600 plus they would need annually to get insured under the ACA is either so well off they can't comprehend true poverty, or else so arrogant they can't comprehend it.

When my situation bottomed out, in 2006 and 2007, I had two friends who loaned me $ 15 a piece. Both the friendships ended because I didn't pay them back a month later. They didn't get it - if you are already not eating, where do you get that $ 15? It doesn't exist. It might as well be fifty dollars or five hundred dollars or a million dollars. When you are only eating every other day, the money just isn't there. (Couldn't immediately get food stamps, as retirement monies had been
at the $ 10,000 mark just a few short months before.).

[woo me with science]

479. Well said. nt

[L0oniX]

534. "DU is a great place for the affluent" ...that would explain the lack of empathy,

centrism, third way, corporatist and DLC. Let them make 15k a year with a disabled wife and watch them change their tune.

[neverforget]

544. You're absolutely correct. I'm doing better now than I ever have with a well paying union

job. However, I remember, sympathize and empathize with those that aren't doing as well as I am because I was there not that long ago. Just because I am doing well does not mean everyone else is too. The lack of empathy is what gets me.

[sabrina 1]

569. I think you hit the nail on the head. Those who are doing well, most, not all, are impatient

with anyone who isn't. You see that a lot both on this and on DK. I imagine people who are treated that way on these forums, or watch others being treated that way, don't stay around much.

There are so many other venues on the internet now where people can speak about what their concerns are. So why would they bother to stay where their issues don't matter?

[MADem]

402. Alexa only measures traffic from people using their little toolbar, that's why.

You don't have their toolbar? You're not in the club.

I think their software interfaces with Amazon (they own the thing) but if you're not signed in, you aren't signed in....

[Enrique]

7. i think that represents a ranking

for example #1 would be at the top, etc.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

14. Hmmmm... Now you have me wondering about that. EDITED: I think you're right now that I look closer.

They are showing rank, not traffic volume as they used to. Looks like you now have to have a paid account to get traffic volume.

Still, DU isn't as popular as it used to be and it's popularity, when measured against other sites (scroll down Alexa page to view), is in decline.

[alarimer]

27. It's completely messed up and misleading.

Y-axis should ALWAYS have 0 at the bottom. If you do anything else, it is essentially lying.

I think it's designed to make the decline look bigger than it is. Talk about a bad chart.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

40. Figured out above, I think. This is why I put the question to the board, to figure out

what's going on. I explain (hopefully, lol) in post #22. The graph shows a decline in popularity when measured against other sites, which are not provided. I initially read it as traffic volume but even then 1.5k would not be below 1.0k. So, the #1 site would be at the top of this graph and it's showing DU's drop in popularity, rather than traffic volume.

Alexa used to show traffic volume but I guess it's a paid feature now.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

41. no, you build a chart to show what you intend

this is attempting to show a decline in relationship to other sites. to have 0 at the bottom and 15K at the top would look like a huge increase... which this is not showing.

sP

[mahina]

110. Agreed, and we shouldn't mistake volume for utility.

DU serves as an aggregator for content that's distributed outward without a word said.

DU has been under attack for years but remains a very useful online community. I don't mistake volume for value here any more than I do in real life.

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Because DU used to be a place where people supported Democrats

As the election approached, a good number of posters here shit on the Democratic Party subsequently causing the traffic to this site to die down.

It ain't rocket science.

[Enrique]

9. that's not true

DU used to be MUCH harder on Democrats. Nancy Pelosi for example was mostly hated here before Obama became president.

[Cha]

243. She wasn't hated by me or anyone I cared about. Just the haters.

[Hekate]

294. +1

[BlueCaliDem]

405. + 2. Thanks for speaking truth to power, Cha. eom

[DisgustipatedinCA]

571. Truth to power? Do you know what the phrase means?

i like Enrique, but I'll bet he'd be surprised to hear that he's the source of power at DU.

[BlueCaliDem]

576. Yes, I do. As I read it

Cha mentioned Haters, and that's what I responded to.

Posters who have this visceral hatred for Nancy Pelosi - more than Boehner, even - have their finger on the Alert button the moment they don't like a pro-Democrat post - and then vote, en masse, to kill the post so that the poster they'd targeted doesn't get to respond in the thread in addition to having their account placed for review with the Admins.

That's not power then?

[MADem]

440. +3 nt

[librechik]

499. In 2001 I thought Democratic Underground

meant the more radical liberals among Dems, who discussed and practiced progressive politics and were critical of Third Way Mainstreamers.

Sadly, we wound up welcoming all Dems.

Sometimes it's frustrating that The Underground is so full of namby-pamby centrists and conservatives. But it is what it is. We will always have less traffic when there isn't an election. We just started down a bit early. Maybe the trolls were told to stand down since the fix was in.

[MADem]

509. This site was founded because AL GORE AND JOE LIEBERMAN were robbed.

Both of those individuals (one, admittedly, deservedly) have been thrown under the DU bus.

I think what constitutes 'liberal' depends on what decade you're sitting in.

[librechik]

516. Here at DU "liberal" depends on who is saying it

I've been called all kinds of things here. And for some reason the decade frequently gets mentioned.

What's up with that?

My desire to exterminate the rats who stole the 2000 election has nothing to do with the decade. Those SAME rats have been around for generations.

Some values are universal.

[librechik]

517. BTW, I was here on day one--because of Dec 12, 2000.

[MADem]

525. I was too--or pretty close to it.

I was more a reader than a writer in those days, but I was grateful for the site.

[librechik]

536. I was driving everybody crazy on my non-political forums by posting anti-bush articles

How heavenly it was to post them freely without having to fight too many trolls.

[MADem]

542. Heh heh--I can relate!

I was in the government's employ and really couldn't say too much publicly at the time!

[LWolf]

567. It did.

I remember feeling like an actual moderate...a first for me.

I haven't changed. Today, I am way too far left for Democratic Underground.

[Bobbie Jo]

12. Chronic pessimisism takes its toll

In 2006 I came here to get away from anti-Democratic sentiment.

Now, this place marinates in it.

[Andy823]

219. I couldn't agree more. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

408. That's exactly it - although I'm certain that is the goal of some members around here.

They are in glee that Democratic members here are chased away so that they can shut this place down. That's the only reason why I continue to pay my membership and remain here. I won't let those Fringies chase me away from the only place that had given me so much solace when it looked as if George Bush would be "re-elected" in 2004.

Edit to add: But as a result of these trolls-acting-like-Democrats around here, I'm also a paying member of other pro-Democratic Party sites.

[SidDithers]

21. +1...

DU used to support Democrats. Now it hosts attacks on Dems that are just as vicious as those you see at right-wing sites, sometimes using the same sources.

Sid

[Metric System]

43. +1

[Ikonoklast]

117. Yep. I didn't join to argue with Republicans.

I can do that IRL any time of the day.

The anti-anything Democratic posters are winning here.

[Historic NY]

187. Well.....

And apparently the owners are not concerned. and then there is the discussionist thing. My solution give less because there is less.

[1StrongBlackMan]

142. Not only attacks Democratic politicians and the Party ...

But seems to revel in telling others that they are not "Democratic" enough because "MY values are THE TRUE Democratic values."

Who, other than a twisted few (myself included), wants to take time off from other of life's activities, including actually WORKING FOR Democratic candidates/the Party, to have to debate whether they are Democratic, enough?

[freshwest]

565. +1

[stevenleser]

205. GOP attacks are not sophisticated. Its easy to learn what they are. You are assuming

it takes some kind of great research to figure out Republican lines of attack.

It doesn't.

[Sheepshank]

250. WTF kind of bashing is this?

yeah...I suspect the corruption is running rampant through some veins...but not the veins of Sid Dithers.

your kind of back handed bashing is very offensive. How about you hang out for a while and get to know the posters before you make further inane misconstrued statements.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

261. If you have something to say, say it

If you are accusing Sid of being a troll, say that and stop asking cutesy-poo rhetorical questions. If you don't have the guts to come right out and make your accusation, then self delete your post.

[Jesus Malverde]

460. Sid a neocon troll?

Jesus

[Hekate]

293. Hillary = Caligula. Hillary = Nixon. Straight from the vile fantasies of Newt Gingrich.

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

324. Thank you! I could not have said it better.

[Number23]

470. Don't forget "But OBAMA hisself said he was a moderate RepublIcan!!one" and "Nixon was to the left

of Obama FOR REAL"

I mean, with such abject and utter stupidity touted here over and over and over again, is it any wonder that so many have run for the hills from this place and so many that remain have absolutely NO idea why they do???

[Hekate]

488. Amen, sister.

Nice to see you, btw.

[Number23]

537. The feeling is more than mutual

I'm not here nearly as much as I used to be. Which according to the stats in the OP, makes me like just about every other poster here.

[MFrohike]

308. Oh bullshit

I know it's popular to claim that there was some mythical golden age of DU where everyone marched in lockstep and universally supported everybody with a D next to their name, but it just ain't true. When I started reading this board almost 10 years ago, there were plenty of Democrats regularly ripped up one side and down the other. Zell Miller (he earned it), Joe Lieberman (had yet to actually campaign for a GOP nominee), Howard Dean, every last Blue Dog, John Kerry, John Edwards, the Clintons, Robert Rubin, Russ Feingold, etc. Hell, the only change I've really seen in that regard is that occasionally there's a kind word for LBJ these days.

The only really major change I've seen in DU is the myopia of some long-time members, who like to claim that things were somehow once different.* The problem is that if you bother to do the google searches, you find it just ain't true.

*Well, and Swamp Rat doesn't seem to be around. I did enjoy his pics.

[Marr]

327. Yep.

The complaints used to be that the Democrats were rolling over for conservative policy under the Bush Administration. Now the complaints are mostly that they're doing the same under the Obama Administration.

The only thing that's changed is the person in the White House.

[Mojorabbit]

448. Great post! nt

[AndreaCG]

400. True

There's a difference between criticizing policy and declaring you would never vote for a particular democrat because s/he isn't left wing enough, totally ignoring the fact that republicans almost without exception are worse. Systemically so.

Plus the number of alerts is annoying. I serve on far too many juries for what I consider specious complaints.

That said, it's still a good place to get info.

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. that is EXACTLY what I was thinking...

before the Left Leaning Independents started trying a coup!

[FSogol]

54. +1. Why hang around a site dedicated to bashing every Democrat.

[ellenrr]

65. why not? nt

[Nay]

285. Why not, indeed? A good proportion of them need bashing, plus

a 2 x 4 upside the head. They're acting like Republicans and we want them to stop.

[laundry_queen]

426. Exactly.

And I don't know what DU the above people frequented, because it wasn't this one. I remember a lot of Dem bashing back when I started lurking even before the war. Anyone who acted like a republican got it (And richly deserved it). I think the difference now is that certain people forget what it was like and think that because there's a Democratic president, all criticism must cease. And then they go on about how this place has changed because there's criticism now. I think it's kind of funny when they think suddenly there are all these critics that never existed before and that DU has changed...when THEY are the ones who have changed, who have more vested in how their president is viewed and so seek to protect at all costs. So many of these posters I remember from BEFORE '08 when they said one thing and now they say another...the ONLY reason being because it is the administration's stance. Tell me why I should stand with people who have no principles?

[RiverLover]

411. +1 for bashing "conservatives". Conservatives are republican. They should just own it.

"Conservative Democrat" makes as much sense as a "liberal republican".

It doesn't exist.

[progressoid]

58. Snort.

Are you forgetting the 04 and 08 primaries?

Lotsa tombstoning and gnashing of teeth.

[deutsey]

193. Been here since early 2001

I have to snort over that post as well.

The phrase "circular firing squad" has applied here for some time, especially during the primaries.

[LostInAnomie]

74. +1

[sabrina 1]

83. Where people supported Democratic Values and not DLC/Third Way values. The demands on

partisan forums that people dismiss their principles, the MOCKERY of the word 'principles' itself in fact, has driven many people to Social Media sites where they are free to speak their minds.

The consistent DLC/Third Way attacks on Liberals, like eg, Dennis Kucinich among others, who actually did stand up for principles, the demand that people just hold their noses and 'vote' then are told to remain silent, all this has resulted in extreme partisanship over principles being rejected.

There are many other places now where people can freely express their concerns, another word mocked by the Third Way btw, the turning of actual legitimate concerns into 'ponies' etc, all this has simply moved people to find different venues.

Mixed forums are probably the future of online Political forums as ISSUES become more and more important to a majority of the people, ignored by their parties.

The 2014 midterms delivered that message loud and clear. 'We will vote on ISSUES only, and elected officials show support those issues. We will not elect people who do not represent us on the issues anymore'.

Now it's up to the Dem Party to 'get' that message. And if they do what they did in 2010, another Third Way decisions, BLAME THE VOTERS, the voters will respond as they have twice now.

[Nay]

273. 'We will vote on ISSUES only' - yes! The vitriol that rains on people here

who are going to refuse to blindly pull the lever for any D is disheartening. The Dem Party does need to get the message, but you know what? I think it has already gotten the message and doesn't give a shit. As long as the perks keep flowing for them no matter who 'wins,' they don't care.

And that's another reason I'm bowing out of lots of discussions here. I start to write something, then I go to myself, aww, what the fuck is the use?

[sabrina 1]

435. You're not the only one. Many people have given up on partisan forums where all they hear from

are, it appears, political operatives and people who are so blinded by loyalty to a party that the knee jerk react to anyone who actually tries to GET THIS PARTY back to what it claims to be. People haven't stopped caring or working, they just grew tired, finally, of the vitriol they don't need to deal with anymore. They have families and friends they deeply care about and when they try to discuss some of the issues here and are mocked and attacked, they KNOW this is no longer the place to get anything done.

You are right that the party doesn't care, but to keep those perks they still have to win. Otoh, I think the only answer is to start from the bottom up, locally and at a state level, to build a foundation of candidates that WE choose and direct our energies to and take back this party from the Corporate entities that currently control it.

[Hekate]

303. The message of '14 was delivered from a million couches: "Yawn. I don't care. Pass the chips."

The 2014 midterms delivered that message loud and clear. 'We will vote on ISSUES only, and elected officials show support those issues. We will not elect people who do not represent us on the issues anymore'.

I'm sorry, Sabrina, but that statement is just funny. For whatever reasons, people stayed home and let the truly motivated RW decide. Saying the unmotivated would "vote on issues only" begs the question of what issues exactly would motivate them to get off their asses and keep the wingnuts out of office? It also begs the question of why the RW base is so damned motivated, the most motivated in the country.

There are things we can and should do differently: reinstate the Voting Rights Act and make it applicable to the whole country. Make election days into federal holidays. Mandate honest redistricting. Make voter suppression tactics a federal crime. The list could go on and on.

But you know what? In order to get any of those done we have to elect Democrats because the GOP is happy with the way things are now. And Dems (or people who would vote for Dems if they gave a shit) are not happy -- so they stay home? And we get the governance the highly motivated GOP base has voted for.

Screw the "Third Way" blaming that goes on here. That doesn't get to the root of the problem.

[blue neen]

354. Amen to that.

Excellent post.

[sabrina 1]

433. Oh please, you are delivering the same old 'we must elect anyone who slaps a D after their name'

routine again. Tell the Dem Party Leadership to provide REAL DEMOCRATS, not right leaning, corporate impostors, which to our shame we DID vote for, over and over because 'the other guy is worse'.

You are not listening. We DID that, and we got a cabinet filled with Republicans in Defense especially AND National Security along with Corporate CEOs. Where are all the Progressive Dems we expected in key positions in this government?

It's too late to try that old fear tactic.

And you are wrong about voters staying home. Voters have gone LOCAL and in this last election they VOTED for Progressive Issues anywhere they appeared on ballots, across the country. They just saw no point in voting for people who are not going to represent them on those issues. But they WON so in communities across the country, people now have progressive legislation that they once hoped they could get from DC. DC is so far removed from ordinary people at this point, the people no longer trust them.

Those are facts and the Dem Party can listen finally and stop listening to think tanks, paid for by Wall St, start listening to the people and they will win.

[marlakay]

447. My daughter in CO told me she didn't vote

She is 33, an independent, said she was turned off by both sides who played nothing but fear messages, one said vote for me or if your daughter gets raped she can't have an abortion, the other said vote for me or they will take away all our guns...

She told a friend, I will vote for who ever does even one single ad on a issue I care about or something positive....didn't see one so didn't vote.

[Marr]

466. +1. I don't even think it was a principled stand on the part of voters.

It's simply that so much time as passed with Third Way leadership, that the Democratic Party is no longer particularly associated with liberal positions in the minds of voters.

The 99% has been so completely disregarded in terms of policy making for the last 20 years, that a *Republican* can score points talking like a populist. And these Third Way politicians, who have been coasting on the fumes of party's previous accomplishments while working to dismantle them-- they're just blindsided by it.

[KoKo]

538. Interesting Post...Sabrina 1....something to think hard about..for Future

[LWolf]

568. I've always been an issues voter,

and I've always seen the conflict between this self-identified "liberal" (which USED to be "left-wing&quot board and mandated partisan loyalty. It got turned up when a POTUS with a "D" next to his name was elected. Issues went out the window for too many.

[hrmjustin]

89. i am all for criticism but sometimes it gets too personal with thd 2016 primary fight.

The name calling has started already.

I got called stupid and third way even though I never had anything to do with third way.

[cyberswede]

279. The jury system is utterly inadequate for the upcoming primary bloodbath.

...and we all know you're neither stupid nor a 3rd way-er.

[hrmjustin]

287. Thanks cyberswede!

Yes I think the jury system has its drawbacks but I will say the one who called me stupid got his post hidden.

I hate to do battle with friends over the primary so I don't engage in heavy battle anymore.

Thanks again my friend.

[LawDeeDah]

138. I think that's it mostly. DU is sort of a pergatory place

where you stay for a while then go off to where you are meant to be - a more Democratic or moderated site or the other way, the hot place.

I was pretty stunned that someone here called the President those awful names with shit in it, I looked back on that and was more stunned at how many people thought it was a good post! Duh! No wonder DU is barely able to call itself a democratic site and then with that awful Stormfrontish Discussionist forum, owned and made by the owners of DU - well. You can't blame people for not taking this place too seriously.

[Jesus Malverde]

463. "that awful Stormfrontish Discussionist forum"

Comparing discussionist to stormfront?

Really?

[LawDeeDah]

149. Combine that with the disaster of a jury system

and you got plummet.

[Skidmore]

218. What might your team be?

Just curious.

[Capt. Obvious]

178. LOL!!!

[JI7]

199. because too many see posting on DU as Activism and being some kind of revolutionary

it's a site that says they support democrats and yet some are shocked when people want to come on to see positive things about democrats and would prefer to attack republicans.

[stevenleser]

208. +infinity nt

[stevenleser]

207. Yup. Some of us want to move the country forward taking into account political realities.

Others think that ignoring political reality is best and prefer to pat themselves on the back for being more Liberal/Progressive than thou while ranting at those in office and on DU they feel don't measure up in the "Liberal enough"category.

[Generic Other]

302. Ignoring political reality?

DU is a bull session where a bunch of people who agree with one another on a lot of important things discover we also disagree on a lot of things. I always believed we tolerated dissent on issues because we believe in certain core values of democracy. We don't change our principles like day-old underwear.

It is up to each of us to decide for ourselves whether we measure up to our beliefs.

Many people on the left are used to hearing snark from the Republicans who spend a good deal of their time and energy complaining about how unAmerican people like me are. It doesn't make it so. When that same tactic is used by Democrats on DU to purge those deemed disloyal, it still doesn't make it so.

That's the political reality I see.

[AverageJoe90]

396. It's worse than that, Steve, I'm afraid.

Some folks have now escalated to full on attacks and nasty behavior in general, as a cudgel against those who disagree with one or more of their pet views(especially literal "white privilege", amongst certain other things)....I've been here only since 2011, but I KNOW it wasn't this bad before last year. Something changed, and not for the good, I fear.

[lumpy]

260. That's my conclusion, Cali_Democrat.

[baldguy]

289. +1000

That's today's DU for you: The Democrats get TS'd and the Democrat haters get kudos.

[Logical]

398. LOL, ok. nt

[LondonReign2]

573. DU used to be a place that supported Democratic ideas

now a small but determined clique makes post after post telling us we need to move ever further rightward. I wonder how a more conservative Democratic party benefits them, hmmm?

[SoCalDem]

5. trolls and a general willingness to attack almost anything

I often look at threads that are rather innocuous, and within many of them, there are many rather undeserved attacks.. My guess is that when someone takes the time to put up a thread, they are not necessarily looking to start internecine fights.

Where we once had reasoned debate and suggestions that may have caused people to bend their philosophies when shown other facets of an issue, we often now have rude comments and outright attacks.. people soon tire of that, and move on.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

8. Good point, SoCalDem. Love your sig! Haha! nt

[Octafish]

91. Well said, SoCalDem.

Personal attacks disguised as discussion don't serve to enlighten. They do work to shut down discussion on DU.

[Quantess]

129. If that were a new phenomenon

it would have been a good point. Trolls have been a permanent fixture, in an ephemeral, rotating sense, and continue to reincarnate as usual.

[2banon]

357. uh hem.. that seemed like an unnecessary snark to me. (maybe I'm misreading)

a good point was made, but you had to slap it down. what was the point of doing that?

[Aerows]

360. You asked a fair question

my friend! One I was about to ask.

[2banon]

368. thanks for that mon ami.. sometimes it's kind of hard to read intent on line.

[Quantess]

397. Hi Aerows. I may have offended you, unintentionally.

If I offended you in some way, I apologise. You will need to explain it to me.

[Quantess]

393. Oh yes, you are so delightful!

Is that what you wanted to hear, and believe?

[2banon]

508. Strange comment and question.

[HappyMe]

6. I don't think it's dying.

People come and go, interest comes and goes. Politics 24/7 isn't for everybody.

[NaturalHigh]

10. Honestly CTD...

I don't really understand Alexa very well other than the rank you posted. I thought it used to post numbers of hits per day and things like that. Maybe you need a subscription now or something.

[Blue_Tires]

13. Oh, I imagine the numbers will skyrocket once we have President Paul in 2017

and there's a common "bad guy" for liberals to all unite against...

I know it's a whole different discussion, but you might do well to ask yourself why 90% of the black posters on DU vanished, as well...

[Cali_Democrat]

19. Bingo

African American posters fled this site in big numbers roughly around the time the Paulites/Libertarians started coming.

It ain't rocket surgery!!

[JustAnotherGen]

33. One just got banned the other day

For pointing them out for what they are.

[Skidmore]

130. Yep. Along with a good

number of women too.

[Horse with no Name]

374. +1000

and then there are those that just do unwarranted attacks which drive others away.

[1StrongBlackMan]

159. Gee ...

I wonder why?

[1StrongBlackMan]

167. Hmmm, Let's see ...

African-Americans are the Democratic Party's most loyal cohort ... We have clear, though not monolithic, prioritization of political values ... We leave and DU's popularity tumbles.

Now that could be a coincidence ... Or, it could mean, among those that self-identify as Democrats, the African-American political values set more closely matches those of the Democratic whole; than, those of the Paulites/libertarians.

[freshwest]

566. +100

[BainsBane]

24. I wonder if it isn't the same discussion actually

and part of the same reason so many feminists have left permanently or rarely post anymore.

[JustAnotherGen]

32. Plus 1000

[Recursion]

329. ^^^ This (nt)

[Aerows]

358. Yes. n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

34. another Salient point...

allowing some knuckle heads that cannot accept White Privilege as a "thing" is driving good Democrats away from this site..

[1StrongBlackMan]

157. To your first point ...

Oh, I imagine the numbers will skyrocket once we have President Paul in 2017

Probably, but only after months and months of "those damned 3rd-wayer/DLCers lost us another election" and "If Democrats had given me something to vote FOR I would have voted, er, I mean ... given THE PEOPLE something to vote FOR, THEY would have voted" posts.

To your second point ... I don't think it much matters to the vast majority of DU.

[Agschmid]

258. Yup.

[Derek V]

15. Cliquishness

If you're "in," you can say any damn thing you want. If you're new, "I Love Puppies" is the statement of a troll.

[Rod Beauvex]

23. Indeed.

[LostInAnomie]

76. +1

[Hekate]

306. Now you're just being funny. Formulating a coherent argument will get you where you want to go.

Probably. Maybe.

[hrmjustin]

16. I noticed that site as well.

I think the primary fight may make this trend continue.

Having read Alexa for 2 years I think this maybe the lowest DU participation period in several years.

We lost a few prolific posters or they don't post as much.

[Aerows]

362. Many people felt shut out

Nadin Brezenski was on that felt shut out and she quit posting. There are others. You can't keep banging on people's heads and then wonder why they leave.

She was a good DUer, too.

I like DU, but there have been times when I felt like saying "To hell with it" and go somewhere else.

[hrmjustin]

364. I miss Nadin.

I hear from her every once in awhile.

[taught_me_patience]

17. My interest has waned significantly

moderates get attacked here a lot and it gets pretty tiresome.

[SoCalDem]

25. I'm no moderate, and I now rarely post here

I check in and read a bit, but I am not one who loves extended argument, just for argument's sake. The level of discourse has dropped immeasurably..

[mike_c]

319. me too....

I used to love participating here because I learned so much from thoughtful discussions with people who really seemed to know what they were talking about. When I stopped visiting regularly, it seemed like DU had degenerated into a blindly partisan opinion flinging-fest where points of view were entrenched rather than discussed, developed, or modified. I stopped learning things other than whom I didn't want to engage in flame wars with, which turned out to be a substantial number of current DUers, or at least current some months ago.

Interestingly, I haven't returned more than half a dozen or so times since last summer and most of those have been during the past week, and I found that getting out of the DU echo machine reduced my outrage fatigue considerably. I don't have television and get most of my news from print sources (mostly online), so what really changed is that I read less angry discussion now. The comments at the end of most unmoderated news stories are such a cesspool of incivility that it's easy to utterly disregard them.

[branford]

29. Moderates? Don't you mean DINO, gun-humping, cop-loving, capitalist pig, racists?

[ProfessorGAC]

190. Yeah, Them Too

If the focus narrows, the numbers will fall. That seems pretty simple math.

The more inclusive the site, even when there is no lockstep agreement, the greater the number of people engaged.

If there becomes a need to have one POV over another, even if the two are philosophically aligned (at least in general), folks will bail.

Seems like that to me, anyway.

[stevenleser]

209. Very well said. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. Orthodoxy

[LostInAnomie]

120. +1

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. "Enjoy your stay"

That's why.

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. because they say things YOU like?

[lumberjack_jeff]

140. The general hostility displayed to all those who don't already know the doctrine

Is the reason that those who exmigrate aren't replaced.

[Quantess]

139. I suppose you won't accept pizza unless

it is a wooden pizza topped with flannel plaid and beard hair? Delivered in 30 mins in a Cat? no delivery

[Quantess]

268. WTH, I thought that was funny.

I don't know what just happened but I am sure it wasn't my doing?

[lumberjack_jeff]

277. I'm fond of pizza

and I'm occasionally surprised that one hasn't yet been delivered, wooden crust or otherwise.

[Quantess]

286. Too bad I missed the brouhaha below.

I usually miss the drama.

[Comrade Grumpy]

26. Because of those factions I don't like. I blame them. n/t

[octoberlib]

263. +1

[Quantess]

269. Oh, hello Comrade Grumpy!

Self Appointed Grand Prize Winner of "More Liberal Than You in All Categories!" trophy

[Aerows]

367. Was that necessary? n/t

[Quantess]

372. Probably not, but he has another think comin'

whenever I catch him having an opinion to the right of mine.

[Comrade Grumpy]

389. Gee, I earned myself a stalker.

[Quantess]

406. Excuse me? You stalked me first.

Following me around, telling me in so many words I'm a fReeper. "I can think of a better site for you" or some nonsense shit.

[Jesus Malverde]

465. Lovely....nt

[loveandlight]

30. the site is less than it was...

I haven't posted much, but I've been here a long time reading. The main reason I came here was to find a progressive haven, a place where people wanted to move the politics of the country leftward instead of to the right, to figure out how to make the Democratic party represent workers and minorities and women better instead of just being Republican-lite. Over time, that has degenerated to the point where you never know what a thread is going to turn into. People don't understand white privilege or various women's issues or even the whole discussion with guns, it just has gone too mainstream. You can get these discussions on any other site. I still come here but find I read less and less. And yes, way too much trolling, too much name calling and insults instead of thoughtful discussion. There used to be really interesting back and forth, intelligent and thoughtful. That is less and less as well. It's sad, too bad. I still come but not nearly as interesting.

[deutsey]

202. Another old timer from 2001!

Like you said, I also came here because it was "a progressive haven, a place where people wanted to move the politics of the country leftward instead of to the right" in the nightmare days after Bush's coronation.

These days, I lurk more than I used to. More often than not I'll start to respond to something and, about half way through it, I'll say: "Is it really worth dealing with the hassle?"

I increasingly decide it isn't.

It's a shame, but I guess life goes on, man (as the Dude would say).

[Oilwellian]

241. You speak for me as well, deutsey

There is clearly a deep schism that wasn't here during the Bush years. Let's hope it means the end of the disastrous Third Way control of the party.

[Nay]

270. It is indeed less than it was, mainly because there is so much less intelligent

back-and-forth discussion. I've been here since about 2002-03, and there used to only be quite intelligent, rational posts and replies that actually addressed the posts. Now I see much more irrational, RWer-style arguments and replies. I also see what seems to be RW infiltrators. They don't get tombstoned.

The level of discourse has plunged -- you see everything from irrational arguments and knee-jerk talking points to indecipherable grammar and hideous spelling. It may be elitist, but if you can't write and spell, you probably shouldn't be on this board. Those who have trouble formulating ideas and expressing them in written form are wasting their time here.

It's also disheartening to lay out the facts, give links to things, and then still get the same specious argument back when you have just blown that argument out of the water. This is a trollish way to 'discuss' -- to keep repeating your incorrect talking points until the poster gives up.

I do read here a few times a week, but I'm not posting much, and when it gets so that one topic is being beaten to death, I bow out for a week or so. I feel better already.

[TwilightGardener]

31. Endless obsessive never-ending dissection and rumination about a handful

of topics (Ferguson), instead of the broad range that used to be discussed here.

[840high]

46. It does get old.

[ellenrr]

69. ++

[amandabeech]

94. ++

There seems to be a narrow group of topics and a narrow range of discussion within those topics, at least on GD.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

99. I remember fondly the great essays/essayists and the wide variety of discussion topics. I remember

when duplicate posts were called out and threads were merged.

I think the moderation used to be better too.

[lumberjack_jeff]

281. The infrastructure places too much risk and too little reward for creating those essays.

Cat videos. No one alerts cat videos.

[XemaSab]

125. For me, I started posting a lot less when I started to become cynical about Obama

There's just not a lot to say there.

[SolutionisSolidarity]

304. I know how you feel.

But it's not just Obama. It's hard to imagine anything getting better at this point. Not without a great deal of pain first, anyway.

[marlakay]

450. That's how I feel

It's not just Obama or the democrats or republicans, it's the whole country, like they have fallen asleep and just don't care and I guess I am slowly joining the pack and giving up any hope of sanity and a good future for my kids.

[Mojorabbit]

453. Same here. I had such high hopes.

And you can't discuss any of it without being swarmed by certain posters who cannot abide anything negative being said against his policies. There is no place here where any policy can be discussed like back in the day without the usual people disrupting the thread. It sucks.

[belzabubba333]

184. or circumcision

Last edited Thu Dec 4, 2014, 01:22 PM - Edit history (1)

[LanternWaste]

224. Or fear of accurate spelling and dogs.

Or fear of accurate spelling and dogs.

[belzabubba333]

490. typos happen -and im not afraid of dogs, had em all my life

let those who are typo free cast the first stone

[RobinA]

186. That and

the outragoholics telling people what they should be thinking.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

267. That's a good point. If I checked DU only once a week,

(or however long a particular topic takes to run its course), I don't feel I'd be missing much. Once upon a time, I didn't feel that way.

[hexola]

35. When were all the rape threads?

A few months/weeks ago GD was cluttered up with that stuff...wasn't it?

Seemed like something was going on...infighting.

As a 10+ year member, my participation waxes and wanes...so I don't feel part of this trend.

[SidDithers]

56. I think it's because trolls who get banned for stuff like...

Boston conspiracy/mossad talk. "Let's keep blindly worshiping the current administration simply because of race."

sneak back in and pretend that they aren't on their 5th DU account.

Sid

[ChisolmTrailDem]

114. 219,245 user registrations ... How could you possibly know that? Are you keeping records? nt

[JI7]

204. it's not hard to tell , most users don't post regularly

but of those who do you can notice similarities in posting patterns and they would often give away who they were by mentioning something connected with the old name.

and when they bring up things that happened before they registered under the name name .

[ChisolmTrailDem]

215. Yea, but the volume of activity and number of participants...a need to analyze every nuance of every

poster/sock to even be able to discerne similarities and posting patterns and know what connects to a former user and the tracking of who joins when.

I just wonder how and why someone would want to have such knowledge and then use it to make accusations.

[JI7]

361. it doens't take much, it's something that just becomes easilly noticeable

because not everyone posts on every thread. not even everyone who signs up posts on threads.

certain ones who have been banned can be more recognizable because they have engaged in things which got them banned .

[MADem]

409. I don't think you have to be on MIRT to figure out who is a sock on many occasions.

But for those who have served on MIRT they often have a pretty good idea.

People who have served on MIRT most definitely have that knowledge of which you speak, and they use it to PPR disruptors. That's a good thing, as Martha would say.....

[joshcryer]

425. Posting behavior, comments, favored topics.

The repeat offenders don't change. They also tend to stalk long timers and you find them easy to spot.

[snooper2]

108. We got saga 13.444 code U-0009*22jjUy floor cram treble 9-1

Resssed 9-1 9-1

copy

[ChisolmTrailDem]

112. It's all about that bass, no treble.

[snooper2]

116. you totally posted the wrong version of that song, here is the REAL Meghan Trainor

[ChisolmTrailDem]

121. You just caused me to choke on my coffee, literally!

Hadn't seen that version before.

I loves me some thick women, though

[Eleanors38]

422. "Red beans and rice didn't miss her."

[merrily]

554. Mmmmm. Red beans and rice.

[QC]

549. Here is Skinner's take on that issue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1259455

[DeSwiss]

100. +1000

[woo me with science]

122. Well said.

An interesting experiment is to read DU with the bolded entries below handy for reference. The MO of shills here consists of lots of tried and true political propaganda tactics, down to the predictable ad hominem attacks on posters who point out the shilling:

The US government's online campaigns of disinformation, manipulation, and smear.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024560097

The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting posters is blatant and unnatural.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News To Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023262111

The goal of the propaganda assaults across the internet is not to convince anyone of anything.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

The government figured out sockpuppet management but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454

Seventeen techniques for truth suppression.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4249741

Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351

Obama taps "cognitive infiltrator" Cass Sunstein for Committee to create "trust" in NSA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023512796

Salon: Obama confidant’s spine-chilling proposal: Cass Sunstein wants the government to "cognitively infiltrate" anti-government groups
http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

Snowden: ‘Training Guide’ for GCHQ, NSA Agents Infiltrating and Disrupting Alternative Media Online
http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/02/25/snowden-training-guide-for-gchq-nsa-agents-infiltrating-and-disrupting-alternative-media-online/

[Starry Messenger]

38. Most of the posters who post about social justice were run off.

Lots of teachers were banned on DU2 and the failure to rein in Union haters has run off a lot of people in the labor movement.

Who does that leave? Now it's an endless circle jerk between two wings of majority older white liberals fighting about Warren vs. Clinton, or endless rounds of who hates/loves Snowden the most.

I stay because of a few posters I like, but I used to be here hours each day, and now I barely check in.

I think social media has attracted a lot of people who might have otherwise signed up here. Sad, since it isn't as streamlined a format.

The owners have made it clear that they consider this place more of a business than a community, with inevitable results.

My .02

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. It leaves Left Leaning Independents....

and turns DU into LLIU!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

133. And, Leftist or Left Leaning Democrats which leaves it..DU.

[VanillaRhapsody]

240. No because if YOU are not pledging to vote for the winner of the primary...even if it is HRC

You are not a Democrat...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

271. Sure. Oh, maker of election law.

[VanillaRhapsody]

274. Its not election law....its just facts...

Independent = not dependable.

if you are not able to agree to the decision that WE Democratically made in the Primary...then you are not dependable and therefore Independent....Go your own way...

Why are you ashamed of it?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

292. What gives you that idea?

I vote for the best candidate on the ballot. It's called democracy. As for not "not dependable", I am dependable in voting for the best candidate instead of convenient labels.

[Scootaloo]

165. It also leaves a lot of right-wing Democrats

How's that seething hatred of liberals going for ya, VR? keeping you warm through the winter season?

[Puglover]

201. Can I +

a trillion?

[VanillaRhapsody]

242. and HOW many Right Wing Democrats do you see on DU? Pray tell!

BTW...everyone to the Right of YOU....isn't a "Right Wing Democrat" and if there is no one here farther left than you are.....YOU are the Fringe!

I AM a Liberal Democrat.....and I will vote for whomever wins the Primary even if it is HRC....just like you....Right Scoot?

[ellenrr]

70. recommend ++

[adirondacker]

179. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Smarmie Doofus]

414. I might add that the teachers *I* can think of who were banned were banned...

... because they were unsparing in their criticism of the anti-teacher and anti-teacher union animus of the current bi-partisan ( Obama-Bush) federal education policy.

[Starry Messenger]

437. Exactamundo

[raouldukelives]

39. Because it used to welcome liberal and progressive minded people and viewpoints.

Now it is being utilized as an echo chamber for corporate shill talking points. Those who disagree are marginalized, locked out or ignored.
It will rebound when we have a common enemy again. Suddenly you will see a swing in people who used to be for more war, drone strikes, surveillance, destruction of education and corporate socialism returning to the fold and claiming they were always against those things.

[HappyMe]

48. Well said.

It seems there is a line you have to toe. If you don't ....

There is a big difference between supporting and criticizing candidates, and blindly supporting a candidate just because.

[treestar]

84. That is not true

The progressive minded in fact have full ability to trash the Democratic party here and they do it all the time. Of all people to play the victim! That group are the ones making it suck to support the Democrats on Democratic Underground.

[Quantess]

291. Well deserved trashing, as rare as it happens!

Who can non-corporatist liberals/progressives turn to?

[creeksneakers2]

539. Rare?

[woo me with science]

103. +10000 You are exactly right.

And you are exactly right about the next part of the plan, IMO.

Corporatists on both sides are working hard to set the stage to elect a Republican next time, because eight years of corporate Democratic rule has opened too many eyes to the fact that we are an oligarchy rather than a democracy now, and that the predatory corporate agenda continues no matter which party is elected. That awareness is dangerous for the PTB.

They NEED a Republican in office for awhile so that that corporate Democrats can pretend to be against corporate/warmongering/police state policies again. They hope that the country will forget all this silly oligarchy talk and go back to believing that the only thing wrong in Washington is that a Republican is in office and we need to rally to get the Third Way Democrats back in again.

Excellent post.

[xiamiam]

225. raise you both up another 100000

I watched the report today on democracy now about drones and torture (the un rep talking about us human rights abuses and another report about the fact that drones have killed 29 civilians to 1 target on average and on and on ..I remember obamas' first white house press corp dinner when he made a joke about drones which i found offensive. To me, it was a signal of what to expect from him. I was shocked at the time and took a lot of heat here for even mentioning it. The admins support obama, so criticizing him on the site, while more acceptable than during the first term, is still an uphill battle. The threads always get derailed.. usually by the same group of folks although there are always new recruits ..so its not worth it. Du is more conservative than its reputation. It WAS a terrific place to hang out before..and it hurt me deeply when I realized how it was changing. I actually felt I belonged here at one time. I still check in regularly but I am interested in the truth ..period. There are lots of places on the internet to find it. I haven't watched tv or listened to mainstream media in a very long time but I can almost tell which stations people are listening to by what they say here.
I have no interest in posts which scream about the republicans, or what Joe S has to say. That's one of the ways we are kept distracted by tptb. So, Du is a bit outdated by concerning itself with party over principle.

cue the person who chimes in with the rules of the site..gheezh

I agree with you woo and with the poster you responded to 100%.

[Nay]

278. Amen, Woo. nt

[PowerToThePeople]

386. i need to leave and renounce my citizenship

What you say is the truth. Some day i will be deemed an enemy of the state. That will be the proudest day of my life.

[Jesus Malverde]

533. Ding ding ding...nt

[sibelian]

574. Ah, woo...

Sigh.

The depth of your cynicism is exceeded only by that of those you describe...

(woo)

[Cha]

246. It still does..not sure why you don't know that? The Victim Card?

[NorthCarolina]

540. That's exactly the reason. eom

[greymattermom]

44. too many personal attacks

Instead of discussion on the issues, most of the posts are filled with personal attacks. Boring.

[Doctor_J]

45. Could be because the party itself is dying

Face it, having 1000 threads on Ferguson is probably not conducive to attracting traffic or even keeping those who would like to get the nation away from the Limbeciles. And every new Ferguson thread gets dozens of recs. A focus on "fight the right" would help IMO.

[840high]

49. +10

[appalachiablue]

343. The Ferguson event is a critical part of fighting the right, the major purpose to me.

A dying party, maybe, sad thought, but it's happened before here. I hope not. IMO in 20+ years it has moved so far away from major Dem. Party values of leaders like FDR, JFK, LBJ, EMK that any return to earlier strength will be long and difficult. The left is heavy as ever with thinkers, writers, watchdogs and activists who continue, mostly defensively to fight immense power and wealth on the corporate, global right. It's a huge lift. Return to fundamentalism in religion and loss of rights for workers, minorities and women are also major factors. Although young I remember the gains of the '60s and '70s and the enormous rollback since is discouraging. Yet we have to continue the fight. (And this post probly won't count cuz the thread is down now as the case with DU.. blah, blah, blah).

[Cali_Democrat]

436. Focus on "fight the right"?

How many posts have you created recently going after Boehner, McConnell, Cruz, Paul or the rest of the GOPers?

Call me crazy, but I never see you fighting them.

Now you're mad about Ferguson posts?

LOL.

[Doctor_J]

500. Thanks for the advice

I happen to believe that corporations and hate radio and school privatizers are far bigger threats than a piss pot like Ted Cruz. Health Insurance corporations are particularly odious, and I complain about them frequently. And since you have apparently been reading all of my threads, maybe this little point of clarification will help calm you.

Also,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5902041
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5894420
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5890735
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=108019

Finally,

Now you're mad about Ferguson posts?

I will assume this was posted in the wrong place, since the post to which replied says nothing like this. I am not

mad about Ferguson posts

.

I believe that having hundreds of separate threads on Ferguson is probably overkill and a waste of space. Even allowing for chronic vanity posters who need to get rec's every day, there is no need for that many new posts.

[Metric System]

47. If it were up to some here, the Democratic party would be a very small tent.

[sakabatou]

50. The y-axis is inverted. That's why.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

52. the chart shows positional rank

it is inverted as it SHOULD BE to show the decline in popularity of the site in comparison to others.

sP

[sakabatou]

173. Oh

[bravenak]

51. The election is over.

Will probably see a surge when candidates begin to declare they are officially running.
That's my official reason.

[jonno99]

119. my thots too...

After elections, most folks tune-out political discussion until the next cycle...

[bravenak]

325. I took a break in Aug/Sept too.

Been posting less lately too. More trolls than usual. There are probably many reasons.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

53. Too much interest on maintaining the status quo centrist Democratic part of the Party?

You might as well ask 'Why are fewer people registering as Democrats and voting for Democrats?'

If Warren could revitalize the party as a populist party, I think popularity of and traffic on sites like this could pick up as well, as long as the site wasn't overrun by those who shy away from populist policies.

[woo me with science]

93. +1 If people felt the Democratic Party were actually functioning to defend them

rather than to defend the corporatists and oligarchs who have purchased it, there would probably be more interest in a Democratic board.

People have lost enthusiasm for the "democratic" two-party system, because, as Jimmy Carter pointed out, we no longer have a functioning democracy.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

96. ^ This may also be a good indicator of why Democratic discussion is waning. nt

[RiverLover]

182. +1 nt

[LittleBlue]

211. Excellent post

I would feel a greater connection to the party if I didn't think it were run by corporate stooges.

[kentuck]

55. Really?

You want to know?

It has lost its progressive majority. There were two or three prominent posters that have since moved on that dominated the board for months and were applauded for their DLC viewpoints. Good progressives either left or just stopped posting as much. Now, we have the right-wingers moving over to DU from Discussionist.

Many people just got tired of trying to respond to all the conservative bullshit that kept flooding the board. We no longer kick their asses out the door.

[RiverLover]

195. +1 I was surprised at how conservative it was here.

Really surprised. I often feel like I do when talking to my rethug family members about current events when here at DU. At first I thought maybe a bunch of republicans were here posing as Democrats, but now I don't think that. I think its just a bunch of well meaning people who vote for party & wear blinders on accepting facts like Bill Clinton right before leaving office, in 1999, deregulated banks with the repeal of Glass-Steagall and that allowed them to become too big to fail & play derivatives to crash the economy.

It happened. We don't want a repeat. We want our Democratic policies to be reflected in those with D behind their names. It doesn't make us anti-Democrats because we want to improve things. Core Democrat values could improve the US. We need people who will actually work to apply them in office.

Republicans fight for less regulations, more off-shoring of jobs, etc. We need to wake up to the fact that elected officials in our party have enabled that, pushed for it in some cases. Then if we see it, maybe we can change it.

But its off-putting to be demonized for wanting Democrats to be Democrats & for wanting the US to be a better place to live.

[malokvale77]

318. Well said

I rarely log in anymore. Most of the good, thoughtful posters are gone. There is little worth reading and replying to lately.

I tried to get my kids to sign on, but after looking the site over, they both said no. The terms they used to describe DU were, corporate government propaganda. Then they looked at me funny.

I logged on to say thank you.

[RiverLover]

369. Thank you right back, malokvale77

I can tell we're missing out by not having your input here. Maybe it will get better, and you'll start coming around more often.

[malokvale77]

392. I will certainly respond to a few good posts...

now and again, as I did yours. DU still has "some" members that I deeply respect.

[woo me with science]

57. DU's corporate Third Way message brigade is already trying to swarm and spin responses to this OP,

which is how DU rolls these days. I think the answer is simple: People are weary of the failure of the party to represent us rather than Wall Street, and they are weary of the message control/propaganda machine that infests and poisons even places that purport to be discussion areas for citizens who care about liberal political principles and are deeply worried about the direction of their country.

I think people are finally waking up to the fact that we have a united oligarchy rather than a gridlocked democracy, and they are increasingly aware of being played by the owners of the Red versus Blue theater production.

I think corporatists vastly overplayed their hand this summer when they had corporate Democrats actively suppressing Democratic votes for the 2014 midterms. I think the deliberate lack of a clear, positive message and the DCCC "Accept Doom" email campaigns....combined with the relentless campaign on DU and elsewhere by Third Wayers to insult and demoralize the base... caused a lot of people to realize that rallying around party has become a scam.

DU at least claimed to stand for liberal principles when it began. Now, anyone who comes here and attempts to use the site to speak honestly about what corporatism has done to this nation....from looting the middle class out of existence to trashing the Constitution and implementing a police/surveillance/propaganda state....will meet immediate, relentless response by our resident message control brigade. There is a 24/7 propaganda machine here defending the party no matter what the party stands for....and right now the party is very, very corrupted.

We don't have a functioning democracy anymore. We have a purchased, united, bipartisan oligarchy that is pretending to be a democracy while relentlessly implementing fascistic policy no matter which party is elected. Keeping the illusion of Red and Blue "democratic" teams alive, while also propagandizing tolerance and submissiveness out in the nation for the predatory corporate agenda that continues no matter which side is elected, is a full-time job now for the corporate message machine. Meanwhile, the Americans whose lives are being destroyed by this corporate takeover are merely trying to find somewhere to discuss what to do about it, where they won't be relentlessly message controlled, diverted and disrupted.

Corporate voices here now start approximately half of the OP's on this site. It used to be that messaging like that was rare. It has been slowly increased here to become the norm.

Those who build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines. It's sad that propaganda has become part of daily life in this country. But it happens in all countries that turn authoritarian.

[hrmjustin]

60. I think it is also more than the primary fight though but the arguments between different 2016

camps are a big part.

I have been posting less myself.

[SidDithers]

61. ...

Sid

[Bobbie Jo]

222. No kidding

It's the 4,522nd version of the same post.

No wonder people are losing interest.

[LostInAnomie]

366. Indeed

[SixString]

66. +1

[treestar]

80. You're still here

So not weary yet.

[hrmjustin]

107. I did not respond that way.

[Capt. Obvious]

206. I didn't see any

[woo me with science]

230. +1 Predictable as the sunset,

both the group and the tactics.

[pa28]

345. ++++

[savalez]

59. Competition?

Rawstory, Talkingpointsmemo, Huffpo, DailyKos, and so on... There's a lot of competition out there. Plus those sites are not afraid to post shootings. Despite what the DU admins think, those stories are very important to a lot of people and get a ton of interest on those sites.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

63. Perhaps. I don't frequent those other sites so have no idea of their popularity vs. DU. Some other

good reasons are offered in this thread. I know I've felt like leaving a few times myself but it's hard to leave your home.

[savalez]

68. I also wonder if

regulars from here are going to the Discussionist site created by the owners of DU. Check out the Alexa rating of that site. That should be interesting.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

75. No data for sites ranked below 100,000. Discussionist.com is at 179,796 and delcining. Of course,

this is all based on Alexa's numbers. However, Alexa is a common tool for webmasters to gauge competition.

[savalez]

79. Interesting.

I'm glad it doesn't rate.

Good post by the way.

[progressoid]

62. FYI, Huffpo and Freeper traffic is similar

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/freerepublic.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/huffingtonpost.com

[ChisolmTrailDem]

67. Oh WOW! I didn't think to compare it with those sites. Now I'm wondering if this is an

overall trend of a loss of interest in politics; a loss of interest in debating/arguing; a frustration with society; what?

[savalez]

72. Sorry to jump in here but

you may be on to something. I know I have been less interested in this stuff. More So since the next 2 years will be a complete do-nothing BS waste of time with RepubliCant's heading up both houses.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

81. Jump in wherever you want to, savalez. Glad to see you! I've been participating less myself in

favor of other pursuits but DU is very stimulative and engaging for me still. I am drawn here every day to see what's going on in the world. However, the hate here and the changes that have taken place since I first discovered DU in 2005 has taken it's toll on me.

[savalez]

95. Thanks!

I discovered it in 09 and it was great but I too see it waning. It seems like it's on autopilot to nowhere.

[justabob]

232. if all are declining, the simplest answer is

that we just had an election and the next one isn't for a couple of years. Makes sense really, most people do not live and breathe politics 24/7 just because. You know? I know that I am sick to death of seeing people badgered mercilessly day in and day out about choosing a candidate to vote for before we even know who all is running, or any kind of campaign starts. It is really incredibly off putting.... can't I wait until 2016 to decide?

[grasswire]

469. it is interesting to look at the demographics of that trend.

The sites that are growing have fewer users who are posting from school, or from work. The sites that are growing have users who are mostly better educated. I don't know what that says about DU. But something to consider.

[Brother Buzz]

78. But, but Netflix is growing

I'm just saying

http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?o=lt&y=t&b=ffffff&n=666666&f=999999&r=1y&t=2&z=30&c=1&h=150&w=340&u=netflix.com

[progressoid]

97. People are tired of politics and want some entertainment?

[Socal31]

340. House Of Cards gives a taste of both!

[Xithras]

105. Reddit, otoh, continues to skyrocket.

/r/politics has over 3 million subscribers and more than a thousand people reading at any given moment on any typical afternoon. It also has actual politicians and government leaders posting AMA's and responding to people.

What typically happens is that every time Reddit makes the news, people wander into the Reddit black hole, and often don't wander back out. What happened in August? The Apple celebrity photo leak put Reddit in the headlines for days, introducing a lot of new people to the site. They see the site, they see the broad breadth of the topics offered there, and they stick around.

DU is a niche site targeting a fairly narrow political demographic. Reddit has been killing off niche sites for years.

[Ikonoklast]

141. Yep.

Way more time there, way less here.

I don't have to argue with people that hate Democrats there.

[Xithras]

192. Quite a few former DU'ers are now Redditors.

I spend time at both, but over the last year or so have definitely shifted most of my online discussion to Reddit.

Plenty of people who hate Democrats there though. I guess it depends on the subreddit you're posting in.

[AngryAmish]

146. check it out, it looks like you are right

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/reddit.com

[Odin2005]

477. Add me to the people who got sucked into the Reddit black hole.

Though that /r/News is dead to me, now, because it is being taken over by RW trolls. I think Conde Nast, Reddit's parent company, wasn't liking the fact that /r/News was becoming a haven for revolutionary political views and so took it off the defaults and purged the mods.

[AngryAmish]

144. That is interesting!

theory 1: alexa changed their metrics

theory 2: The last election was the most repulsive thing I have ever witnessed. I have a hard, unbreakable belief that every politician is an incredible shithead. The septic, metastatic nature of politics these days would repel anyone with a brain.

[malokvale77]

331. theory 2: definitely (nt)

[woo me with science]

344. ...

Theory 2:

I would write, "$eptic, meta$tatic nature of politic$."

[AngryAmish]

350. oh, that is clever.

Nice.

[Rowdyboy]

64. Hate. Lots and lots of hate....

[greatauntoftriplets]

77. You just won this thread.

So true.

[sibelian]

570. True. NT.

[tritsofme]

71. Perhaps more DUers are keeping Alexa spyware off their machines?

I've always read that Alexa stats aren't particularly useful and or accurate.

But how surprising would it be that a Democratic community is less active in the run-up and aftermath of what everyone knew would be a nasty election?

[blogslut]

87. ^This

Alexa has never been an accurate measure of site traffic.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

92. Perhaps. It is used, however, (or maybe used to be?) by a lot of webmasters to

gauge certain metrics.

[Recursion]

379. Not this webmaster. Never, ever, ever, ever trust client-side reporting

If it's not in your own server log, don't trust it.

[sibelian]

575. Suddenly? Since August-ish?

hm.

[m-lekktor]

73. Party/Obama loyalists claim party/Obama critics are driving people off,

party/Obama critics claim it's party/Obama loyalists driving people off. I wonder which it actually is if either one.

[Paper Roses]

82. Many of us do not post as much anymore because:

Too many posts start out with some literate conversation and end up in a fist fight.
When I first joined DU in 2005, I posted a lot. It was fun to discuss this and that, not just politics. As time progressed, I posted less because so many people jumped on what I said. I know it is the same with others.

Don't mistake my point, it is still a great place but I'm not as brave as I used to be.
I follow so many great posters and, as the thread progresses, out come the contrarians. Not that their points are not valid, just that it turns things into an argument, not a discussion.

[steve2470]

85. +1 nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

88. "I'm not as brave as I used to be." <-- You may be onto something here, lol. Neither am I!

Great points. I've been visiting DU since 2005 also and it's just as you say.

[olddots]

90. its in the name

We were the underground then became the above ground now will have to go underground again .
Oy it gives me a stomach ache .

[hrmjustin]

101. lol i went from 9,500 posts in 90 days to just over 2000.

After the sept 9th NY primary I felt burnt out o I stopped posting as much as I do here.

[Systematic Chaos]

104. The DU is nearly neck-in-neck with Freerepublic...

And Discussionist is over a full order of magnitude behind both of them and nearly neck-in-neck with Blaze.

Draw your own conclusions.

[gvstn]

106. O/T But how does Alexa come up with "related sites"?

According to Alexa, DU is most closely related to http://whatreallyhappened.com/

That is not good.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

109. Wow, where did you see that? I was quite taken aback by the search keywords Alexa lists

as being the most searched terms that lead to DU.


Top Keywords from Search Engines

Which search keywords send traffic to this site?
Keyword Percent of Search Traffic
1. 801 area code 2.17%
2. jennifer lawrence icloud 1.61%
3. 200000/12 1.32%
4. puting 1.31%
5. icloud hacked 1.26%

Alexa's search volume graph also shows a ~50% decline in search volume for DU.

The only way to straighten out the veracity of Alexa's numbers is for a DU admin to chime in and post the numbers they get from Google Analytics.

[gvstn]

124. It is towards the bottom of the Alexa page.

The complete list of sites linking to this site is available to Alexa Pro subscribers.
What sites are related to democraticunderground.com?
Related Links
1. whatreallyhappened.com
2. dailykos.com
3. alternet.org
4. democrats.com
5. talkingpointsmemo.com
6. somethingawful.com
7. rawstory.com
8. rasmussenreports.com
9. politicalwire.com
10. mediamatters.org
More
Categories with Related Sites
Regional > North America > United States > Society and Culture > Politics > Parties > Democratic

I only care because DU used to have a conspiracy theory/radical reputation and was usually not taken seriously by mainstream left sites. I think that reputation has softened over the years and was rather shocked by that related sites list.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

135. Thanks. I hadn't scrolled down far enough to see that. =) nt

[Kingofalldems]

111. Republican rat fuckers attacking from both left and right.

[DeSwiss]

113. K&R

- The government is a cesspool. The whole system reeks to the heavens. The 1%ers no longer bother to hide their disgust and avarice toward we, the hoi polloi, publicly. They own the government outright now thanks to SCOTUS and enough wimpy DINOs, and they'll be damned if anyone's going to change it back. They paid for it fair and square.

It has been said: ''that sending in a populist do-gooder to Washington DC to reform it and bring about change for the people, is like sending virgins to reform a whorehouse.''

[center][/center]



That's what's happened......

[LostInAnomie]

115. The jury system and MIRT have turned this place into a purity contest/witch hunt...

Last edited Wed Dec 3, 2014, 10:56 PM - Edit history (1)

... and most of the country doesn't buy what "pure" DUers are selling.

Like it or not, DU has very little tolerance for dissent. The jury system became a tool for enforcing orthodoxy, and was used to target DUers that had differing opinions. This drove long time DUers away because they used to be free to post whatever they wanted on here as long as they didn't violate the TOS. Now, not only do they have to not violate the terms of service, but they have to make sure they don't post anything "disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate" which can literally mean anything. Get suspended for 90 days for petty nonsense and even long time DUers won't want to come back.

MIRT serves to make sure that we don't get any new posters on here that aren't "pure" enough. If you ask them they'll say they keep trolls off DU. In actuality, they target new DUers and set up a bar for entry. Post something that doesn't follow orthodoxy = PPR. Post something that a well connected DUer doesn't like = PPR. Take a differing view on a current event from the DU zeitgeist = PPR. If you have to spend your first 100 posts watching what you say, and hoping no one takes offense there isn't much reason to stay.

Essentially, what that admins have set up is a good way to drive away old members and keep new members from joining. It's no wonder the site is dying.

Go back to moderators and enforcing the TOS.

[hrmjustin]

123. That is not true.

Mirt serves to remove disruptors.

[LostInAnomie]

126. Right...

And, all politician just want to serve their country.

[hrmjustin]

127. Have you ever served on mirt?

[LostInAnomie]

128. I've seen the results.

[hrmjustin]

134. I think you should serve a term and you will see what goes on.

I served on 4 terms and I can count on one hand the times our decision was reversed by the admins.

I understand that there are some decisions that are questioned and tgat is fine but remember that it is done on a consensus decision.

Mirt members put a lot of effort into their jobs.

[cyberswede]

176. Could you please provide examples?

For instance, a link to the profiles of past members who were wrongly banned by MIRT might support your claim. Otherwise, I can only assume you're mistaken.

[Puglover]

191. ...

I would offer that if MIRT members are "putting lot of time and effort into their job." they might be over thinking things just a wee bit.

The moderators and admin used to take out the trash in their spare time. And DU was much MUCH more busy back then.

Every time I see this "how hard MIRT works" I seriously LOL.

Get rid of the jury "system" bring back moderators that know what they are doing. Have them hide rather then delete posts.

And stop the juvenile "time outs". If a long term poster is obviously a disrupting troll boot them the hell off the site.

[cyberswede]

196. Did you intend to reply to me?

I think someone else said MIRT members "put a lot of time and effort into their job."

[Puglover]

197. Oops sorry.

Well you get the idea.

[MADem]

412. MIRT gets swapped out every few months.

What, you think moderators, with biases, and no fixed term, were "better?" If a moderator or three decided that they didn't like "Puglover," they could make life miserable for you--your threads and subthreads could be disappeared any time you opened your mouth. The jury system is more random, but it's less prone to that kind of bias, even if said bias isn't intentional.

Anyone--even you--can participate in the process. Go on and volunteer for it instead of "seriously" LOL-ing.


I think you are confused--posts here are "HIDDEN." Now.

When we had moderators, in the past, posts were DELETED. Subthreads were deleted. THREADS were deleted. EVIDENCE of dissent was hidden--the actual dissent was still there, but people couldn't click a link to "show" the post that had been hidden.

There was much more actual censorship in the moderator days. Now, the only posts that get deleted are from socks and trolls who come back again and again to screw with people here.


All these MIRT people are volunteers--they don't get paid. I'm glad they take out the trash. As for the Time Outs? Some people here like to PWD (post while drinking). I don't think it's a smart idea, but that's me. And some people say things under the influence that they regret, later--a time out gives them the opportunity to contemplate their behavior.

[Puglover]

478. Just a few points.

1. Yes I am "aware" Mirt is swapped out every two months.

2. You misread my post. If the moderators were brought back I would advocate for them to hide rather then delete posts which is what I thought was clear in my post. (I am aware none of this will EVER happen. It's just my two cents.)

3. As to the "perma Mods" I caused quite a stink in the mod forum suggesting that in every six or 9 month period moderators should take a mandatory 3 month break. Unfortunately the kibash was quickly put on that idea by moderators that felt they had a right to be a permanent presence on the moderator team. And for the record we DID have 3 month fixed terms. Admin would simply ask us to PM them if we wished to re up. However again, I felt strongly that camping as a moderator with no breaks for years was a really really bad idea. And that attitude plus the "censorship" were a few of the reasons why myself and a number of other moderators left.

4. Although I have my gripes with some methods of the old system your first paragraph could not be any less factual if you tried. It was simply impossible for the bias that you imagine to happen. Sure there were mods that had problems with particular posters. We are human. However to delete a posters posts simply because you didn't like them would be impossible. There was too large of a mix of people that were moderators that were constantly watching what you did. Not to mention admin.

It is obvious by your post you have no idea what the machinations of the old moderator forum was. And I am sure any of the former moderators, and admin would agree with me.

[MADem]

506. There's no way I could link to examples of moderators "taking out" unpopular posters

because those posts are gone. But I don't think my eyes were lying.

I know what I saw, and what I saw was censorship. Huge swathes of vibrant discussion axed and "disappeared" because one asshole said something sideways. There was a Net Nanny attitude at play where the traces were smoothed over and any signs of visible ire were made to vanish. It wasn't real.

This system might not be much, if at all, better, but at least we know what we're dealing with, here. And if the old system was so great, why was it changed?

[Puglover]

513. I would absolutely agree this system is better

then the old. I.E. deleting posts and entire subthreads. That was absurd and absolutely was censorship. That is why I suggested hiding rather then deleting.

Why was it changed? From the man himself. "I am sick and tired of dealing with other peoples infighting." I am quite sure that comment was made as much at the moderators as regular posters.

I really don't care all that much to be honest. Maybe I am over discussion boards. Dunno. However I do know I have seen a lot of ham handed jury decisions thus my dislike of the jury system. Decisions where jurors obviously didn't even understand the alert. I do know that when making decisions in the mod forum I had folks I could discuss nuance with. And never ever did we act unilaterally.

[MADem]

514. I've seen some idiotic jury decisions as well. Not sure what to do about it.

You can not force newcomers to read the TOS. You can't even force them to have a decent grasp of English--and I've seen people alert and some vote to hide because they didn't understand the meaning of a word or a term. Sometimes, the jury results are dragged out and Juror Number (Whatever) is mocked and derided, but only he or she knows who he or she is--I don't know if that kind of thing teaches any lessons.

Then again, I've seen some spot-on jury decisions. Nothing more gratifying than when seven people agree on something, and it happens on rare occasion.

[uppityperson]

518. 2 inaccuracies in your post, or things you don't seem aware of.

MIRT terms are 3 months, not the 2 you say.

" in every six or 9 month period moderators should take a mandatory 3 month break"
This is what has been in place with MIRT since DU3 started. The term is 3 months, you can re-up for 3 more, but then must take a break, can serve no longer than 6 months in a row.

You are welcome.

[Puglover]

521. Whoops on the "two"

instead of three.

I wasn't talking about MIRT. I don't care about MIRT.

I was speaking about the old Mod system on DU2.

Do try to keep up.

Thanks.

[uppityperson]

527. I saw you said the break should happen with the old mod system, just thought you might be interested

in seeing that it now has happened with the MIR team system. They did what you suggested.

Reading through your posts on this subthread, you continue to talk about MIRT and I thought that even though you threw in something from back in moderator days, you might be interested in how it has been applied to MIRT.

You are welcome

[LostInAnomie]

221. Post #134

Hrmjustin mentions MIRT rulings that haven't been fair and have been overturned. Are you saying someone that has served on MIRT 4 times isn't being truthful?

Also, it's pretty hard to post links to a bunch of deleted "Name Removed" posts to prove anything.

[cyberswede]

226. In the first MIRT term, someone banned a member in haste

...so Admins reinstated that member and kicked the MIRTer off MIRT (however hrmjustin wasn't on that term, so that's not one he was talking about).

The instances hrmjustin is talking about were instances where MIRT discussed the possible troll and decided (as a group) to ban the person. Admins later reviewed the process and decided to give the banned person a second chance (or they felt MIRT was wrong...like human beings sometimes are). It's worth noting that sometimes MIRT will alert admins themselves if they have second thoughts about whether a person should have been banned or not. All the MIRTers I've worked with readily admit when they're wrong, and gladly accept the Admins' decisions. It's also worth noting that these types of reinstatements have happened infrequently.

I didn't really expect you to have any evidence, but I'm sure it's fun to make insinuations that can't be backed up.

Finally, I did get a kick out our your implication that I was calling hrmjustin a liar.

[LostInAnomie]

231. So you cite multiple times the admins. have stepped in...

... to reverse MIRT's rulings, and one where a MIRT member acted unilaterally to ban a poster. Hrmjustin cites more instsnces of reversals. And, those are all just the times you two have served. Yet, you still think MIRT is doing a great job?

Once again, how am I supposed to make my case with posts that have been removed?

[cyberswede]

234. The percentage of reinstated members is tiny

"multiple times" (probably fewer than a couple dozen in 3 years) out of literally thousands of trolls (I've probably banned over 500 myself). And hrmjustin is referring to many of the same instances that I am, not additional instances.

Until you've served on MIRT, you really have no basis for your implications. But, if it helps you feel better to blame other DUers for...whatever it is you're blaming them for, then please proceed.

[LostInAnomie]

301. So, according to your own words...

... there have been dozens on bannings that were so egregiously bad that the admins. had to step in and reverse them (and those are just the ones you were around for). Thousands of banned members, 500 of which you have personally banned. How long has MIRT been around for? Three years? Those are hanging judge numbers.

Keep in mind that we have pretty hands off admins., and not everyone that in wrongly banned is going to appeal. Most of the ones that are wrongly banned are just to say "fuck it" and walk away thinking we're all a bunch off assholes.

It's shocking that you think those numbers show some kind of restraint.

[cyberswede]

313. I never said those that were reinstated were egregiously bad (or even mildly bad)

Those must be your words.

It doesn't really matter to me if you think MIRT bans too many people; Admins clearly don't agree. How many "fuckskinnerdiediedie" trolls should we allow to stay to fall into your acceptable range?

Until you try a term, I'll have to accept that you have no idea what you're talking about.

[LostInAnomie]

316. Just bad enough for the admins. to reverse them.

You know, just bad enough that they had to overrule the system they set up to deal with malicious intruders. A system that you say has banned thousands. That doesn't scream ergegiously bad or mildly bad at all.

[hrmjustin]

328. Can I ask you what exactly is your concern about mirt?

[LostInAnomie]

346. It's not just MIRT.

It's MIRT in conjunction with the jury system. Working together they turn DU into a place where only orthodoxy is accepted as valid. The jury system allows DUers beyond MIRTs reach to be targeted for suspension, and MIRT makes sure that only the sufficiently pure are allowed entry. The end result is a narrowing of allowed views and intellectual homogeneity/hegemony.

Just take a look at Oktober's transparency page:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=317225?=trans

Tell me he honestly deserves to be suspended right now because of those posts. He doesn't, but you know why he is... because he has the audacity to go against the DU zeitgeist a little too often.

Or take me for example, I've been here for over 10 years in good standing for all of them. Personally, I think the idea of rape culture is ridiculous, the talk of white privilege strains credulity, the ranting about the third way is clueless, Michael Brown undoubtedly robbed the convenience store, and there's no proof Darren Wilson is a racist. And, I have not held back in voicing that opinion. Now, if I didn't have 14,000+ posts under my belt, what do you think my chances would have been of making it past MIRT? Out of the thousands (according to cyberswede) of people banned from DU by MIRT, how many do you think are like me that had the potential to be a good duer but spoke out too soon?

[hrmjustin]

351. You must remember that mirt works by consensus.

It is a group of people a with different opinions and ideas so it is not a group of people who all say yes to banning right away.

You must remember that about a good chunck of mirt work is dealing with a dozen or so returning trolls that can't let go. Hence when we say we banned thousands it is really for the most part banning the same pain in the ass. Also mirt bans people that we don't see because they haven't posted yet. Their username is what gives it away and if the computer doesn't get them mirt does.

Spam is another issue mirt deals with often. The night crew deals with it a lot.

Now as for bans based on what side a new poster takes this is done by consensus. Part of mirts job is to keep tabs on posters that they have concerns on and make sure they are not causing issues.

If a really new poster gets a hide than their account is frozen and it is up to mirt to decide if they need to be banned. If tgere is no agreement or the team thinks the poster is ok then the team notifies tge admins and they make their judgment.

If a poster comes in acting more to the right of the site then mirt will act. It is their job to make that call. Now we have had members on mirt who take different views on how quickly to ban or whether to ban at all.

It is important to remember that the admins support the decisions made by mirt or they would overturn them.

The jury system has it's drawbacks and bad decisions are made all the time.

[uppityperson]

523. I disagree with those hides, and I disagree with a lot of your stated positions.

There have been thousands of bannings, not necessarily thousands of individuals banned. LG and death threat guy's banned personas run well into thousands each.

[uppityperson]

522. "fewer than a couple dozen reinstated" is now "dozens egregiously badly banned"?

The DUer/mirter who banned wrongly unilaterally ended with the outcome of that DUer being removed from MIRT by Admin.

I banned dieskinnerdie jerk probably 500 times one mirt term when he kept signing up. I has no problem banning them and even ended up having a ghost for my avatar for a while when he signed up death threatening me for banning him. There are a few trolls who sign up repeatedly, a couple having a couple thousand bannings under their belts.

You should volunteer a term as it is eye opening.

[hrmjustin]

264. I can remember three times in 4 terms,

One was a relative of a member her and wax given a second chance but was banned 4 days later and the ban stood.

The second was a member who's intentions were misunderstood and appealed the ruling to the admins and gave the person a second chance. As far as I know the poster is still here.

The third was banned by accident. Yes that happens but maybe once or twice a term.

[cyberswede]

321. Thanks Justin - I didn't want to underestimate, so that's why I thought maybe a couple dozen total

in the 3 years of DU3.

[uppityperson]

524. I banned one in error and had them reinstated when it became obvious. They came in on a death threa

threat guy spree with a similar name to his. Once I was notified it was in error and a legitimate new duer and notified admin, they were quickly reinstated. I think that is your first one there.

If people don't know who death threat guy is, they are lucky.

After an accidental banning admin changed the software to make sure the one clicked on to ban was the right name as the name didn't show during the multistep process. There have been glitches, but rare. When there have been glitches like that, admin has been good at changing the banning software to avoid it happening again.

[uppityperson]

519. Simple. Volunteer to be on MIRT a term and you can see what it is like, what happens.

[ellenrr]

132. what is MIRT? nt

[LostInAnomie]

137. A group of DUers tasked with removing trolls.

But, the standard to "trolls" is as loose as they want to make it.

[cyberswede]

171. No it isn't

MIRT can ban newbie trolls. Long-term members are banned by Administrators (the software doesn't even allow MIRT members to ban long-timers).

I recommend signing up next time they need volunteers, so you can see how it works.

[LostInAnomie]

216. So, pretty much exactly what I said.

It removes trolls.

[cyberswede]

223. Yes

Except, of course, for this part:

But, the standard to "trolls" is as loose as they want to make it.

I'd still like some evidence of that claim.

[zappaman]

210. No it isn't.

Try serving and see.

[LostInAnomie]

217. Malicious Intruder Response Team

Sounds like a group tasked with removing trolls to me.

[Rex]

251. So you think you know more than the people that actually have served on the MIRT?

Can't you just say, "okay you are right and I am wrong." Impossible to do?

[cyberswede]

322. Mayhaps there is another motive at play

I'm slow, but I eventually catch on.

[cyberswede]

229. Silly...if one serves on MIRT, one can no longer make unfounded implications about MIRT motives

[Rex]

253. But don't you know? Speculating is the same as serving!

I don't get why posters cannot simply admit when they are wrong and move on.

[uppityperson]

526. Here is a link about it. The new sign up for volunteers will be Jan, in Announcements forum

I encourage all DUers to take a turn, volunteer and see what it is, what happens behind the scenes as it is eye opening and working together respectfully with a clear goal is a great DU experience.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=modsystem

[lumberjack_jeff]

145. The high profile posters who have most recently left...

... were generally frustrated at being thwarted from using mirt in this way.

So yeah, doctrine excludes newbies and alienates those who feel they should be entitled to write that doctrine.

[cyberswede]

200. Do you have examples to support this claim?

I've been on MIRT multiple times, and I've seen no evidence of what you're claiming.

[lumberjack_jeff]

290. Old history.

And since I'm no longer on MIRT, I can't provide you a link, but this thread alludes to some of the shenanigans.

[cyberswede]

300. There was one person who resigned from MIRT, but I don't have the details why

I do see someone accusing her of "reporting" them to MIRT, but another MIRTer indicates there was no thread on that person in MIRT, so I don't see any evidence of what you describe (i.e., "high profile" posters frustrated by not being able to use MIRT for a witch hunt).

As far as I know, the MIRTer who resigned communicated her reasons to only to Admins. Do you have additional information that points to "shenanigans?" Specifically, "shenanigans" that indicate she wanted to use MIRT powers for a witch hunt?

[lumberjack_jeff]

315. It's unproductive to go into the issue any deeper.

I have seen MIRT members use the MIRT forum to whip "kick it upstairs" outrage over a hide given to a 20k+ member (me), not realizing that I was a member of MIRT myself and could see what she was saying.

Called out, the occupants of the circled wagons then tried to make it about my degree of involvement in MIRT - it was my fault that they were talking about me, you see.

MIRT has been used to prosecute witch hunts on ideological grounds.

I can't speak to how often those witch hunts were/are successful, and I take assertions that the revamp of MIRT has rendered this impossible in the future at face value.

That's all I have to say about this.

[cyberswede]

320. I wasn't "outrage"...

and kicking long term posters with ToS violations upstairs was a typical practice back them (now MIRT doesn't even see long-term posters, unless they get a 7-0 hide, and can only act to prevent someone from going off the rails, which is actually handled by the software nowadays).

You're hardly the only person (or even MIRTer) to be kicked upstairs. In your case, I'm glad you're not a troll and you weren't banned. However, kicking long-timers upstairs has occasionally served to reveal actual under-the-radar trolls who were subsequently banned by the Admins, which is the way they designed the system to work.

I'm sorry your personal experience with one MIRT member has given you a bad taste in your mouth re: MIRT. But that hardly qualifies as "high profile posters frustrated that they can't use MIRT for witch hunts." That simply isn't what goes on in the MIRT group.

Have a nice night.

[hrmjustin]

355. We kicked things up because we wanted the admins to see it.

If the admins thought that was wrong they would have said it was bad.

I notice you don't want to go further into it but you gave a link for people to see. And for the record I agreed with her on kicking it up and the reason we didn't know you were on mirt was because we never saw you on mirt.

[DeadLetterOffice]

323. Results of your jury service

On Wed Dec 3, 2014, 04:43 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Old history.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5906246

REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Call out of BainsBane over an ancient grudge about a TOS violation that was referred to MIRT ages ago. Not only is he being untruthful, he keeps bringing up his manufactured grudges to instigate shit. This kind of petty meta bullshit could well be a reason for DU's decline in popularity. Lumberjack jeff's witchunt is getting tiresome.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 3, 2014, 04:55 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter refers to the post as a "call out" but doesn't seem to mention ANYONE, just posts a link with a LOT of posts. Since the conversation in THIS thread happens to be with someone also prominent in the other thread, I suspect this poster (Lumberjack Jeff's) grudge isn't the ONLY grudge at play in this alert. Since a huge chunk of this thread seems to be META anyway, I don't see why THIS post should be pulled without pulling whole sections of this thread as well.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Tiresome indeed.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If an alert needs a background story for the jurors to understand what it's about, then no one should be surprised that a juror's initial response (weel, this juror, anyway) is "WTF is wrong with this post?"
This kind of dispute needs some other kind of arbitration. On that basis, I vote to LEAVE IT.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Relatively benign given the idiocy that's been going on here of late. Alerting like this is petty bullshit too. Let it go.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with alerter.

[lumberjack_jeff]

339. I get mail.

I find some... no a lot... of irony in the alerter justifying her alert as striking a blow against grudges.

The point of this useless tangent is that people are alienated from DU for a variety of reasons, one of which is manifest by this alert.

[Agschmid]

462. Oye.

[BainsBane]

335. I'm tired of this maufactured grudge of yours.

Last edited Wed Dec 3, 2014, 09:53 PM - Edit history (1)

and your entire version is fabricated.

You got this hide when I was on MIRT under the old system in which we received notice of all hidden TOS violations.

I, and several other people whom you never mention, voted to kick the hide upstairs, as was my consistent practice with all hides involving bigotry.

You have decided that was all my doing. I have even seen you claim I was the alerter, when I never even saw the post until I received the MIRT notification in my PM box. You have falsely told others I tried to get them banned. In one case it happened to be someone who I had suggested a friend of his put in a word so he wouldn't flame out. That is the opposite of trying to get someone banned.

You apparently think you should have been exempt from regular MIRT scrutiny for TOS violations, that you should have been given some immunity as a MIRT member (who no one even remembered was on MIRT since you had not once turned up before that hide).

My leaving MIRT was my business. I spent 10-20 hours a week for five months volunteering on MIRT. I didn't just turn up when I found it convenient. When I could no longer do so, I resigned. That you think you claim to know my mind is absurd. In reality you know nothing about the situation, but what you care about is inventing a narrative in which I rather than you are responsible for the post that you justly had hidden.

It's time you get over it. The tired grudge is just plain pitiful. I have absolutely nothing to do with you or your problems in life. I don't even post much here anymore. Enough is enough. Just move on.

[hrmjustin]

353. You were a great Mirt member and you did nothing wrong.

I agreed with kicking it up and didn't know he was on mirt because I never saw him. I don't know why this was brought up again against you.

[NaturalHigh]

561. I remember that thread.

I also remember the one in which you asked someone "can you PM me those links?" trying to get me banned. That is not fabricated. It is fact.

[BainsBane]

563. Since you raised the issue

I think it only fair you disclose the subject matter. Another member felt hurt over what she saw as your arguing for revenge against a victim in a rape case where a defendant had been acquitted. It is you who concluded the comment could lead to banning, not me. I never mentioned banning. All posts on this message board are public. If you want something to be exempt from comment, you probably shouldn't post it in a public forum.

[NaturalHigh]

564. I never asked for anything to be exempt from comment.

You have the thread - obviously you remember it well. Feel free to post it up here. I'm not personally going to go digging around for it.

I raised the point because of your MIRT claims. You deny it now, but in that thread you asked another poster, who had made a slanderous accusation against me, "can you PM me those links?" This was during your MIRT time, and it was pretty obvious how you planned to use them.

Yes, please feel free to post that thread and let me be subject to others' judgment, not just yours.

[Nye Bevan]

213. I don't think that's true. I support the Citizens United decision as well as the Keystone pipeline,

both of which are minority viewpoints on DU, but have not had a single post hidden as a result, let alone been banned.

[LostInAnomie]

233. That is because of your wisdom and gravitas, Nye.

Juries know better.

Others are not so lucky though. Take Oktober for instance. Take a look at his transparency page and tell me if you honestly think he should be suspended right now:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=317225&sub=trans

I see worse stuff than that posted by other DUers all the time, but somehow he managed to rack up 5 hides.

[Nye Bevan]

235. Wow, 4 out of those 5 are extremely harsh hides,

which I don't see as even coming close to violating community standards.

[LittleBlue]

272. I only see 2 legit hides. The rest are juries policing a member for having the wrong opinion

That was not what the jury was originally intended to do. "Rude or otherwise offensive" has become anything disagreeable to one's opinion. Since there is no consequence for alerting and losing, we've got a whole department of opinion orthodoxy police on DU.

Unfortunately most people have a diverging opinion somewhere, so now many have been driven off for only being 95% orthodox.

[Rex]

255. Dream on.

This site is not dying, but I know you wish it was.

[LostInAnomie]

282. Yeah, I've spent 10 years on here just hoping the site would die.

You caught me.

[arcane1]

299. Back so soon?

[A HERETIC I AM]

341. "Dissent"

This place has LOADS of tolerance for "descent".

People go down all the damned time.

[LostInAnomie]

348. DAMMIT!!!!

Damn, my lazy poof reeding.

[A HERETIC I AM]

349. Reeding and Fluting;

Sorry...couldn't resist

[hardcover]

541. +1000

You've covered all the reasons I rarely post.

[TBF]

118. I have served on MIRT a couple

times and believe it's not as good as the old moderator system. When this site began it is my understanding it was a place to meet up with other like-minded people who were appalled by GWB becoming president. I joined this site when I was volunteering for Obama locally in 2008. Now the admin of the site seem to be much less involved and are branching out - Discussionist etc. I don't blame them for trying to make a living in this horrid capitalist reality that we all have to live with, but I do think quality has suffered. A lot of right wingers on here now & your chance to catch them is before they have 100 posts, and only if everyone on MIRT agrees with the action. It's impossible to keep anyone but the most obvious troll out with that sort of a set-up.

[LawDeeDah]

131. Daily Kos is quite ahead in rankings

But they have politicians and known people writing there and last time I visited regularly admin was involved in threads. Their format is hard for me to get used to so I roam about for a while then go back there.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailykos.com
Their chart looks way more up and down, based on whatever news of the week is. DU is sliding down on an even line.

Global rank icon1,985

United States 530

DU:

Global rank 8,919

United States 3,320

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

228. Eye of the beholder.

I came here from there, after a front pager (the people who have their columns in the main body of the front page, selected for one year terms of 'office') went on a rant equating posters who talked about corporate influence on some Democrats as being corrosive with people who 'hate the troops', people who are 'anti-voting rights', etc, etc. And had some massive number of site users recommend that rant, including the owner.

As one of the handful of vocal folks on site who kept pointing out how 'bought' many of the Blue Dog types were, I decided I didn't want to be lumped in with idiots, racists, sexists, and the like and pretty much left. I think I've posted something like 3 or 4 comments in the last 8.5 months, when I used to post dozens of times a day.

But when I came here, I found the format on DU hard, and the search functionality weak. It took quite a while to get used to the navigation, and I imagine there are still things I'm missing or can't find because of how things are set up.

[madfloridian]

252. Overall Daily Kos is becoming much more liberal in nature than DU is lately.

I am surprised at that because for a while it was not that way. It is getting so confrontational here at DU that a well-researched post just becomes fodder for attacks.

[hrmjustin]

143. What does this mean for DU?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

148. It probably means that the "underground" part of it's name is no longer appropriate. nt

[hrmjustin]

152. Sites always evolve but there is strong debate here on our 2016 candidates but it does get

personal at times.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

156. I don't know if you remember, but this site used to be scholastic. I mean to tell you there were

political and social GENIUSES and very good minds and good people. I've been a reader/lurker of DU since 2005 and back then I couldn't believe how fortunate I was to find such wisdom, such intelligence, such camaraderie, and such compassion and passion as I had discovered on this domain.

It certainly is not that any more.

[hrmjustin]

158. Yes it is much more bickering than the beginning.

[xiamiam]

244. i discovered du when my brain exploded after bush stole the second term

truthfully, it saved my sanity and I learned so much from extraordinary DU members. I turned du on everyday before dawn until 2010. After 40 years of voting straight D for president, I voted Green party in 2012. I haven't changed my politics. I still dont believe in war for profit, or drones, or extrajudicial killing by a president. I still think that corrupt bankers and politicians should be held accountable. I still support transparency and truth. There are very few democrats or republicans who actually represent any of those values.

[Rex]

257. Well they won't be here much longer, IF they are telling the truth.

I find it funny that the ones that complain about this site the most, offer the least to other posters besides non stop dividing and conquering.

[B Calm]

147. Free Republic has basically the same chart.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

151. Yes, as has been mentioned above. HuffPost too. Why do you suppose the waning

interest in politics, or these at least these sites?

[pampango]

150. "moderates get attacked here a lot and it gets pretty tiresome." "echo chamber for corporate shill

talking points." "used to be a place where people supported Democrats." "too much name calling and insults instead of thoughtful discussion. There used to be really interesting back and forth, intelligent and thoughtful."

Rather than discussing issues and opinions, we spend a lot of time discerning the motivation of a poster. Is the poster a 'corporate shill' or a 'purist wanting a pony'? Where does he/she fall on the FDR/DLC spectrum or the Clinton/Warren/Sanders scale? That's all that really matters. The issue of a post is becoming less important.

[DrDan]

153. it's a site for group-think - diverge from that and be met with venom

It was not always like that. Opposing thoughts used to be discussed . . . civilly. Not so now. I think this trend started around 2008 and has gotten gradually worse.

[BainsBane]

161. Agree. I recently saw someone say another regular poster

was "not a friend of DU" the other day because he mentioned a fact certain members didn't want discussed. Some use the term "DUers" to refer not to people who post on DU but only those who think like them. Here we see in this very thread posts condemning half the people on the site. When people repeatedly make clear that people who disagree with them or even care about issues that don't meet their approval are unwelcome, they can hardly be surprised when traffic goes down.

[YoungDemCA]

155. Because the site's demographics-and thus, perspectives-do not reflect the Democratic Party base

Posters on Daily Kos have addressed this in the past in regard to Daily Kos, but it applies here as well.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/08/20/893868/-Daily-Kos-Demographics-White-Over-50-Well-off-Male-UPDATED http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/07/953417/-Daily-Kos-Demographics-Still-White-Over-50-Well-Off-Male

When you have certain specific demographics dominate the discussion, and that they are many of the same demographics that are (generally) the least loyal to the Democratic Party-in voting and, I would argue, in supporting the ideals and policy objectives of the Democratic Party-that creates a serious disconnect in the perspectives that dominate here.

In related news, many women and minorities have left because they are tired of misogyny, sexism, and racism. Can't say I blame them.

[BainsBane]

162. Spot on. nt

[appalachiablue]

288. I'd like to know where those who are tired of misogyny, racism & sexism go-

[lumberjack_jeff]

297. Google the terms "white men" or "white male" as used on DU.

Combine the observations you see with your perceptions about who is most likely to visit and post on DU. Now circle back to the title of the OP.

Your belief is that DU is dying because we don't hate on the typical user hard enough.

[YoungDemCA]

557. .....

[randome]

160. Because of you.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[BeyondGeography]

168. Because saying nothing more than Third Way, DLC, authoritarian tool of the MIC and/or the 1 puh-cent

is what passes for a meaningful statement of ideas.

And because America is far more complicated and exhausting than we want it to be.

[YoungDemCA]

169. +1

nt

[Bobbie Jo]

227. +2

[Cha]

249. Oh yeah.. really big on the meaningless personal attacks.. it's so "radical"

[Hekate]

334. +3

[joshcryer]

429. Yeah, it's quite a tiresome echo chamber.

I mean I can be for single payer but because I defend the ACA that means I'm a sellout for big insurance.

Or I can be for raising the SS cap but because I defend even addressing SS solvency in the future I am in bed with corporate leeches who want to privatize SS or make cuts to SS.

[Number23]

471. Could not have nailed what passes for "discussion" in this place any harder. Good gracious

[Scootaloo]

170. High tolernce for racists, but low tolerance for liberals

DU's been turning itself into a clique-ier version of Discussionist since well before there was a Discussionist

[Peacetrain]

174. My son and nieces and nephews are millennials..

My son is actually a member here, but I do not think he has posted since 2009.. to be honest they find political sites about as useful as a toothache... Because after any given time, a certain non stop carping sets up, that just bores them to tears.. they were very excited about the changes of 2008, and tend to want to get things done..not sit with a group and carp about the end of the world.. just saying

[ChisolmTrailDem]

180. I remember there being less carping. I remember substantive responses that included as much

information or commentary as was available in most OPs, back when.

I have had to take breaks of the carping myself. Perhaps it's a sign of bad self-control to go away because of carping and then come back to find nothing has changed and then sticking around anyway to endure abuse of myself and of others.

[iandhr]

177. Because it's now Putin underground.

[uhnope]

280. +1 yep

[Baitball Blogger]

181. Maybe it was because the midterm elections did not produce candidates that many people

were excited about? And now that the holidays are at hand, many of us are busy preparing to be with our loved ones?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

183. Considering the similar waning of interest at Kos and Huff, it may really be this simple. Thanks for

commenting, Baitball Blogger.

[herding cats]

185. DU doesn't juice page views with slideshows?

Maybe they should start doing a Top Conservative Idiots that way now that I'm thinking about it?

The way the analytics on websites are set up, it's not actual traffic to a site so much as page views which are counted as traffic. Slideshows are a tool used by most websites to juice up their page views quickly, even if the person clicking/thumbing through it is technically only looking at one page, and is only one person.

If they programmed a way for us to create and use our own slideshows here, I bet they'd see a quick spike in page views from that feature.

[MannyGoldstein]

188. Two words:

Personal attacks.

[laundry_queen]

444. I totally agree.

I think this is the biggest problem. Yes there are others...but they are all exacerbated by the issue with personal attacks. There are posters here who have their 'pet' topic and hell hath no fury like one of those posters when they are disagreed with. Not only do they do personal attacks, they call all their like-minded buddies to attack and swarm as well. And this happens with nearly every topic and includes a very wide range of posters. Those kinds of attacks used to be promptly deleted - and large, bickering subthreads were also usually taken out. So a lot of those people just didn't bother. If you wanted to talk about, for instance, conspiracies...the posters who disagreed with it generally stayed out of the thread or they made a conscious effort to assemble a great, respectful counter argument. Now, nothing is really deleted (and I personally think a 'hide' is silly since you can click and see it - I don't see how this helps anything) and the jury system is a crapshoot. So, those who are too lazy or nasty to compile a compelling argument are the ones who now flood the threads. And it forces everyone else who wants to have serious discussions out because they are not going to spend time on a thoughtful post only to have it turn into a shit-flinging fight.

So yeah, I think personal attacks being allowed to stand is the main issue here.

[carolinayellowdog]

468. alert on a personal attack, and multiple jurors personally attack you

no matter how egregious the original offense was. It totally deters any effort to improve civility and makes a complete mockery of the "no personal attacks" rule and the jury system.

[Historic NY]

189. It will probably pickup again under the Republican President in 2016...

because there is more fighting here, mostly by design. The selection will be over and then it will cycle for another 8 yrs or until the Democrat capture the house or senate again.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

577. How does a republican win a national election without stealing it?

[LittleBlue]

194. Toxic orthodoxy enforcement policed by juries

Any time people disagree anymore, it doesn't result in an argument but a flurry of jury abuse. Example: Most recently, I saw alerts on just about every dissenting opinion on the Brown shooting. These were not necessarily trollish or offensive statements.

Notice how many threads during that time didn't get above 10 posts. The main page of General died in the last few weeks.

People are leaving because orthodoxy enforcement is approaching freeperville levels. Not just being shouted down and called names, but jury-based enforcement.

Reddit, for instance, ranks popular opinions by likes. But it isn't obsessive like DU in silencing dissenting opinions. That's why it continues to grow as we continue to shrink. We chase off new members practically the moment they arrive. We chased off good members because they disagreed in a few areas. This model will never survive. Hence the Discussionist.

[mvd]

198. Well I admit I post less

Mostly come for news and sometimes on topics of interest. The board is to the right of where it used to be IMO.

[shenmue]

203. Because drinking in the middle of the day

is frowned upon.

[LawDeeDah]

212. Part may be the lack of participation from admin.

For an example: I look at Ask the Admin once a week or so and there are so many posts that are outright ignored. I suppose that means the question wasn't proper enough? So much for transparency. Every complaint about the jury ends up with: I wash my hands of this place, it's up to the jury, the jury decides, bye!

I wish that admin would put out some problems or challenges and have members contribute their ideas. There is a fair number of pretty good thinkers here still, I really wonder why this rich resource isn't utilized to improve the place.

[applegrove]

214. All the GOP paid sockpuppets had to go run campaigns.

[nolabear]

220. I don't come much now because of the infighting and lack of respect among members.

Seems there used to be far more discussion than constant picking at wounds and pissing matches. I love a good discussion and disagreement when it's clever, backed by facts, when people listen and respond rather than just attacking and having contempt for one another.

I don't like to be paranoid, but sometimes I wonder if it's by design. But then again, people who believe in things I believe in can sometimes have very antagonistic ways of communicating those beliefs.

[Ohio4theWin]

236. You have a different opinion and your get called a troll Republican

A lot of "You don't agree with me!? You're a troll."

I told a story of a teacher who had a class full of students who asked why they should get jobs since the government would supply them with food and housing. Man was I slammed. No one offered advice on a lesson plan that would help these students with creating goals. I was labeled a mouth piece for the right. That's gets a little frustrating, I rarely come here anymore looking for advice. I have reddit for that, more people there open to realities of the world?

[Rex]

237. After reading this thread, the reasons are right in front of you.

Just read this thread. Same reason we cannot have a META forum.

[wyldwolf]

238. A word about Alexa

Alexa only measures traffic from people who use Alexa - which usually manifests itself as an annoying browser toolbar. And if you look at any number of sites (I checked freerepublic.com, CNN.com, foxnews.com, disney.com), 3 of those 4 also experienced dips in the same period.

Explanations? Maybe Alexa is has changed the algorithms, browser updates may be blocking Alexa's functionality or people have wised up and have uninstalled Alexa, etc.

There's really no way to get an accurate count of a site's traffic. Even Google Analytics is essentially an educated estimate. But DU's admins know what they're data is.

[seabeyond]

239. For me, we have been well conditioned to have no expectations

We do not look progressive anymore. Melba toast

[Turbineguy]

245. Success by wingnut trolls

[in_cog_ni_to]

247. I left this place

because of the horrid jury system, hated the new DU3 (I see the format changed over the last 3 years-that's a good thing. When did that happen?) and many other reasons. That was 2011.

I started lurking here after the Nov. midterm, just to see how DUers responded to the disastrous outcome. I hadn't been on this site since 2011 and I use to have DU withdrawals - that's how bad this place got. It seems to not have changed at all.

I joined DU immediately after seeing the "DemocraticUnderground.com" banner at the Idiot-in-Chief's 1st inauguration. That was a LONG time ago. Things have really changed around here since those days. Much more mean and nasty from what I remember, though it was pretty mean and nasty by the time I checked out. Many threads I open now have an argument going on about something. It's also not as "Liberal/Progressive" as it use to be, but that doesn't surprise me at all - that's where it was headed. Though it is sad to see. I actually ended up hating this site - with a passion and didn't miss it at all at the end. It was a relief to leave DU behind.

Okay, back to lurking!

Hi! to all the old timers that are still here! I see you! I'm so impressed with your abilities to endure! VERY, VERY impressive. Kudos!

[SoCalDem]

363. Hi, backatcha

[Kurska]

248. The election happened

DU is always less popular after an election, especially if democrats lose.

I'm sure the same thing happened in 2010.

[NanceGreggs]

265. Except it didn't happen in 2010.

DU has had its ups and downs every year, but always within a 2,000 range of fluctuation. The graph above is consistent with previous years, in terms of higher numbers in January and December, and lower numbers during the summer months. Each year, the numbers went down overall - but stayed within that 2000 point range, e.g. fluctuated between 4,000 and 6,000, the following year between 5,000 and 7,000, etc.

But DU has now gone from a high of just over 6,000 in August to below 15,000 in THREE months. I've been watching Alexa since 2009, and DU has NEVER had a drop-off like this in its history. And that rapid decline started two months BEFORE the election, not after.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

254. Ponies

People aren't getting their ponies, and they are tired of waiting.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

262. Too much copying/pasting from Twitter and Facebook...

and not the in-depth discussion once found on DU. Too much mindless cheering, and not enough discussion. If I want "wisdom" from Twitter or Facebook, I'll seek it on Twitter of Facebook, not DU.

[kentauros]

501. While that's certainly part of the problem,

it is kind of the opposite at the same time. That is, message boards aren't nearly as popular as FaceBook among the younger Internet users, and FB isn't nearly as popular as Twitter for the same demographic.

It's all about instant gratification, not content, and certainly not reasoned discussion

[Man from Pickens]

266. Alexa changed the way they do rankings

A whole host of political sites dropped precipitously in their rankings as a result. It's a methodology change.

Go to alexa and open this link up in a new tab, and check each of the top political sites. http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/political-websites

Note that pretty much every one of them shows a major drop in the same timeframe.

[NanceGreggs]

317. Actually, that's not true.

I looked at a few ...

The numbers fluctuate, but the PATTERNS have remained the same. Some sites are busiest in the summer, some are busiest in the winter, etc.

Salon has fluctuated between 1000 and 1400, and is currently at about the same number it was last year at this time.

Politico ranged between 1600 and 2500 over the past year, and is now at the same number it was last year at this time.

DailyKos fluctuated between 1500 and 2500 over the past year, with a dip to 3000 over Christmas holidays. The site was at 2300 at this time last year - it is now at 2500.

DU has always had its own pattern - busier in winter, less busy in the summer. Numbers have declined slowly over the past four years, but HIGHs and LOWs have stayed within the 2000 points range. DU's pattern was consistent up until September of this year - HIGHs of around 8000, LOWs at around 10,000.

However, at the end of August/beginning of September, DU started dropping rapidly, and there has been no upturn at all. It went from a HIGH of just above 8000 to today's LOW of 14,500. That's a drop of almost 7000 points in twelve weeks. THAT large a drop is unprecedented in DU's history, and if it were the result of a sudden change in Alexa's methodology, other sites would be displaying the same huge drop, along with a noticeable change in their patterns.

[Hekate]

336. Ouch.~~~ Nice to see you, Nance.

[nilesobek]

275. I've been migrating to Live Leaks

lately because they gave me an IPhone 6 and a press pass. But I haven't given up on this site at all despite the relentless factionalism, the neo con war brigade or the numerous clickbait threads. DU is where it all starts for me. I was reading this site for over a decade before joining. They will have to drag me away kicking and screaming.

[TheNutcracker]

283. DU is important in the media atmosphere that we have today...

The media are sending our ten year liberal writer/radio talk host we have worked with, over to the evil incarnate republicans. They are gobbling up the blogs, taking control around the state.

DU is not a popularity contest. It's a discussion about our world. We have a lot of problems, and no one stepping forward. Except Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. The rest is history, right here on DU!

[doc03]

284. The abuse of the jury sustem, people can't handle anyone that disagrees

so they run to the jury like a six year old.

[LostInAnomie]

305. +1

[LawDeeDah]

312. +++

all in hopeful good faith - my hairy buttocks.

[AverageJoe90]

399. Or, when a person has a legitimate grievance against a post that was actually offensive.....

the jury leaves it, because enough of them happen to be rather clueless as to what's going on.....this has happened to me on a *number* of occasions, so I sympathize with anyone who's had similar issues.

[olddots]

295. "smart phones"

Just a random thought

[Ricochet21]

296. People speaking rudely to each other

huge egos, and no respect is why I am hardly ever here anymore.
little civility

[DemocraticWing]

307. Some people are saying it's liberals fault. Some are saying it's the moderates.

I'm not sure, but a constant argument between the two factions might drive people away. I suspect this drives some people away, and new people won't want to register if they're afraid they'll be driven off by conflict.

[AverageJoe90]

385. Yes, but it's more than that, too.

Some folks are even saying that white folks *in general* are to blame, which is undoubtedly contributing to the infighting issue as well.

[R B Garr]

416. And some people perpetuate false narratives on purpose.

Issues that can and should be easily understood are intentionally trivialized. "Some say" that dismissive attitude is really just a way to be disruptive which undoubtedly contributes to the infighting as well.

[cyberswede]

421. .

[XemaSab]

535. +1

n/t

[Lodestar]

309. Lack of representation by Parties. Same thing is happening with the Repubs.

Lack of faith in a corrupt system and therefore lack of interest in Party politics as usual and its sheep...ie. DU

[woo me with science]

347. Clear, succinct,

and true.

Excellent response.

[uhnope]

310. the LBN thread used to be a valuable resource. Now it's slow and lacking

[Neoma]

311. Well...an ex-Duer I know told me about this when it was happening and the reasons why.

I just about left myself, and maybe I will still.

In a nutshell I believe it's about Ukraine.

[Recursion]

326. OMG. People actually take Alexa seriously?

Alexa is what you use to convince pointy-haired bosses of things, because they're the only ones who use it and think it's meaningful.

[unrepentant progress]

330. Alexa: Measuring which sites are popular with people dumb enough to install their toolbar since 1996

[WorseBeforeBetter]

380. Well, someone in this thread takes it quite seriously...

and has done quite a bit of *analysis.* I'll defer to tech people on this; I don't know, and don't really care!

[HuckleB]

332. To be honest, I'm surprised it has taken so long for it to wane.

Discussion in the first few years could be incredible, constructive and helpful to all sides.

That has not been the norm for almost a decade.

[KamaAina]

333. I don't know.

Why don't you ask all the n00bs who joined right after the election?

[Tace]

337. Besides Post-Election Drop, It Likely Also Represents Site Promotion $$ Drop

I sure don't know, yet, from my limited understanding, all sites above 100,000 in popularity have a hefty budget for promotion. I suggest the decline reflects a drop in DU promotional spending post-election as well as a natural drop in organic popularity since DU is always most popular leading up to elections and drops off afterward. It occurs to me that this may also reflect a drop in DU ad and donation revenue linked to elections, thus dropping funds available for promotion of the site. --Tace

[WillyT]

356. Depression, Hopelessness, The Reaction Of The Beaten Down...

[AverageJoe90]

359. There's probably a lot of factors involved here.

I noticed a lot of extreme pessimism in the last 2-3 months leading up to the election myself, so that probably played a pretty major role in this most recent drop.

But you know what? Another thing I've noticed is that there also seems to be a not insignificant correlation between the prominence of "white privilege" and radfem threads and a drop in this site's attendance, and I think I know why: Social Justice Warrior extremism(yes, I went there. Because it was necessary). Honestly, what did these certain cliques expect when they were splattering their "only whites can be racist/all whites are racist & responsible for racism", "if you disagree with white privilege (theory) , you're not a genuine progressive/liberal/etc.", "all men are potential rapists", etc. crapola everywhere? What did they expect? And I know I wasn't the only one warning them that they were driving potential friends and allies away. But did they listen? Fuck no. In fact, I can't even help but wonder if a few of these particular folks aren't just extremists, but even ratfuckers, too: I've noticed a recurring theme-"Liberals/Democrats have just as much of a racism problem as Republicans/Conservatives".....and no, I won't name names, but it's been said, or implied, at varying times.

Yeah, I hate to sound harsh, but this isn't just a problem with a few fringe nuts on DU. It is a general problem, and the activist left is being hurt, and increasingly badly by it; it doesn't really matter, by the way, that FOX News is rarely listened to by all but the more conservative 30% of viewers.....because the muddying of the waters has been enough to confuse the middle, and badly, and we haven't done NEARLY enough to stand up for ourselves. And we already have enough problems, with the fact that the Party apparently didn't do enough to defend Obama's legacy in this year's elections.

This is a serious fucking issue, folks. It ain't just the party that oughta be fixed, so do our efforts on the ground. There's still some hope, with Moral Mondays and whatever's left of Occupy, and stuff like that, but it's time to get back on our feet, and get things done. No more debates on whether or not white folks "enjoy" collective "privilege"--we don't--no more of these debates on "rape culture"--it's largely meaningless anyway--etc., and it's time to focus on actual reform, for real protection of women's rights, equal protection for minorities, and fixing our badly broken sociopolitical system in general.

(P.S., for those of you who may believe in "white privilege" theory, or "rape culture", etc., but who have tried to be as respectful as possible and who haven't engaged in ad hominems, or "No True Scotsman" or "Liberals are just as bad" type arguments, or false accusations of racism, misogyny, etc., than I would like to apologize and clarify that my personal frustrations were not directed towards you. )

[XemaSab]

370. TL;DR: Bitches better STFU

n/t

[cyberswede]

375. Right?

[LeftyMom]

371. Maybe it's the racists, sexists and concern trolls?

But we should definitely focus on creating a DU that looks nothing like the democratic electorate. That's a great idea.

[AverageJoe90]

382. Uh-huh......

Because the majority of the Democratic electorate is composed of the most radical feminists, and those on the fringes of the Social Justice movement, am I right?

In all honesty, I don't doubt for a minute that trolls are a problem here; I've seen a fair share of "name removed" posts over the past few weeks, but I really didn't feel the need to include them since that's an issue that pretty much everyone else is talking about, anyway, and they aren't, from all appearances, a primary cause of the problem that we've seen, even with this past election season.

[LeftyMom]

387. You do realize that outside of the circle jerk of misognynists on reddit "social justice"

is widely considered to be a good thing?

You're tipping your hand dude.

[AverageJoe90]

395. You missed the point in so many ways, it's almost sad.

Firstly, I don't post on Reddit. That place actually does have a major problem with scumbags, unlike DU. Secondly, do note that I differentiated, as in made a distinction, between the SJ movement as a whole(which really is a good thing), versus the so-called "Warriors&quot many of whom, not so good). And, I'm afraid this is far from being limited to Reddit or 4Chan, etc., regardless of what some folks might want to believe.

This is indeed a real issue for the left, and it's about time we admitted that. Just digging in our heels, and adopting more and more extreme rhetoric, just so we can *seem* oppositional, isn't helping us now, and won't help us in the future. If we really desire to destroy the racist/misogynist right, let's stick to facts, reason, and appeals to fairness and human potential; that HAS worked quite well for us even in the darkest of times, and it will work now .

[LeftyMom]

401. You actually don't get to decide that issues unimportant to you* are unimportant or distractions.

*in either the singular sense or the plural sense where you means what you think other white dudes also care about (and where I think you're selling a lot of decent and empathetic people short, fwiw)

You also don't get to make up nomenclature that nobody else uses and then act like other people applied it to themselves while ridiculing them for it.

[AverageJoe90]

404. The irony truly abounds here.

Are you honestly unaware of just how ironic this all is? I mean, seriously?

[XemaSab]

428. It's like rain on your wedding day

[cyberswede]

403. Radical feminists & "fringe SJ warriors" aren't the only people concerned with

misogyny, racism, and sexism - despite your desire to believe so.

[AverageJoe90]

407. I hate to say this, but way to completely miss the point I was making.

For your benefit, I will repost a crucial part of my point from my first post, in bold:

and it's time to focus on actual reform, for real protection of women's rights, equal protection for minorities, and fixing our badly broken sociopolitical system in general.

I'm neither a radical feminist nor could I be considered an SJW in any fashion, and I do care very much about these issues; and I'm sorry you (wrongly) feel so skeptical about me, simply because I have a issue, and understandably so, with how some people are going about things. But I can't please everybody.

[seabeyond]

410. So, being so honest joe, what are the radfem, AAsaying on du that is so fuggin out there? I have not

Heard this way out there extreme.

No accusing and defining the women and blacks on du if you can not back it up.

What extreme?

The mere mention of white privilege and rape culture is your line of offensive extreme?

[AverageJoe90]

413. You know what I'm referring to.

But no, I'm really not sure I want to try to spend hours and hours at a time digging for proof(though there's actually damn good bit of it floating out there), because, frankly, the folks who might need the loudest wake-up call aren't liable to listen, or care. And given how often I've had that issue, it gets tiring having to deal with that crap.

The mere mention of white privilege and rape culture is your line of offensive extreme?

I will say this, it's not the belief in and of itself in such I have a major issue with(I'd have left a long time ago, truly, if that was the case), it's people using said beliefs as a cudgel against those who disagree with them, and that's just one thing. Are you seriously clueless?

[cyberswede]

419. O.M.F.G.

...you know what...never mind...you have GOT to be pretend.

[seabeyond]

423. You can't come up with any extreme just creating caricatures if women and blacks to vilify them and

Their voices.

Rape culture and white privilege does it for you.

How about if I simply disagree with your less than progressive view.

[AverageJoe90]

442. And here you go again, making assumptions that have no shred of truth in them.....

and the fact that you go so far as to insinuate that I vilify all blacks and women---therefore essentially accusing me of racism AND misogyny by implication---is pretty sad, all facts considered.

[seabeyond]

446. You have not and can not come up with extremism cause it does not exist. You vilified women, blacks

For speaking out. Speaking out on issues that many support, not just women and blacks. Your intent is to call out a few louder voices containing opinions to a few. But since what is said on du is just general everyday progressive voice it is well spoken by far more than the few you work so hard vilifying.

You are the one that felt the need to first single out and point the finger at radfem and blacks. It started with your accusations.

The thing? The majority of us white progressive stand strongly and vocally with our black community. And the strong majority of our men stand with our women's issues.

There us nothing extreme here, but the need to vilify progressive voice on racist and misigynist issues.

[AverageJoe90]

451. Do you hear yourself talking?

You are the one that felt the need to first single out and point the finger at radfem and blacks. It started with your accusations.

I myself was attacked, ridiculed, etc. long before I started being unable to tolerate the constant B.S., and it doesn't matter that you don't see that. And the fact that you again insinuate that I attacked an entire group in general(which did not ever happen!), further proves my own point about just how bad things have gotten in regards to personal attacks, etc.

[seabeyond]

455. Ah, you are amusing but for only so many posts.

[LeftyMom]

456. It's time you considered that it's not that everybody's misinterpreting you,

it's that everybody can read what you say.

[XemaSab]

459. Case in point:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5907772

[R B Garr]

484. Wow, that's unbelievable. Good catch.

If only people would think of white people's safety when a black man is murdered in the street. Unbelievable.

[Starry Messenger]

438. TAKE THE MONEY

omfgcointelpro!!!11

[LostInAnomie]

452. That is the elephant in the room.

+1

[Socal31]

365. A simple glance at current GD thread titles will tell part of the story.

Intelligent and rational discussion is being overshadowed by hate and hyperbole.

[PowerToThePeople]

373. too many right wingers on du.

And, there is no hope for America any longer. I wish I could say that Bernie could change the discussion, but it will not happen.

[Nye Bevan]

388. to much bad grammar, to (nt)

[PowerToThePeople]

390. i would take bad grammar over right wingers any day.

[helpmetohelpyou]

376. This message was hidden by Jury decision

[Capt. Obvious]

492. Cannot reply to hidden messages

[grahamhgreen]

377. The far right neo-con trolls masquerading as 'centrists', & pragmatists.

[QC]

381. Bingo. n/t

[hrmjustin]

383. We have a few right wingers here but I don't see that many.

[uhnope]

384. you mean RW neocon Putin trolls masquerading as progressives

[Union Scribe]

431. Crikey, find another note. nt

[grahamhgreen]

487. Putin is a right wing neo-con? Do tell! So Bush & Putin have the same agenda?

[hrmjustin]

489. Well he hates lgbt people.

[grahamhgreen]

493. That makes him a homophobe, not a neocon.

[hrmjustin]

494. how would you describe a neo-con?

[grahamhgreen]

495. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, those that subscribe to PNAC doctrines

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

[hrmjustin]

496. Thanks for the link.

And one quick question on Putin. How would you describe him?

[grahamhgreen]

512. Russian Oligarch.

[uhnope]

498. Putin is a neocon in the Russia context--far right, throwback to previous regressive ways

and the politics are the same as neocons in the USA--anti-gay, anti-free press, pro-military intervention, pro-increase police state
Of course the situation on the ground in Russia is much worse and different so it's not a simple parallel. For example, the neo-Nazi death squad connected to the Kremlin killing dissidents and political opponents--that would make the Putin regime more comparable to South American dictators.
http://www.romea.cz/en/news/world/russia-neo-nazi-gang-connected-to-kremlin-murdered-anti-fascists-immigrants-and-judges

[grahamhgreen]

511. So, he's a Russian oligarch, as opposed to those here who would destabilize the Ukraine and then

advocate for endless war with East Asia - the American Oligarchs, AKA neo-cons.

[Major Hogwash]

464. You will have a choice in 2016.

Either vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate or Rand Paul.

[hrmjustin]

391. Election night 2012 the site went to defcon 5 but on election night 2014 we went to defcon 1 only.

I think that says a lot.

[MADem]

415. I think it says 12 was a Presidential election, and 14 was a midterm.

Alexa is a bullshit measure--it's not accurate or relevant anymore. It only measures activity by people using the "Alexa toolbar." Do you have one of those?


Me neither.

[hrmjustin]

418. Your point on Alexa is a good point.

I did not even know they had a toolbar.

I really thought we would at least get to defcon 2 in election night. I guess people were just not as interested.

[MADem]

439. Alexa used to mean something eons ago--it's just a datapoint now, that examines a minority of people

who access the web. In fact, the subset it examines are old farts who aren't using the latest technology, so that makes their data doubly useless.

You might want to ask the admins if they've increased their server capability--I suspect they have. For that reason they'd be better able to handle huge upswings in traffic, and not have to use the same old methodologies that they used back in the old days when "space" on the net as pricier to purchase. They couldl have twice the number of "customers" with newer equipment, and not have a need to go to any "defcon" at all.

I'm sure their access cababilities have increased by leaps and bounds--they aren't still using fourteen year old equipment that they had when they first rolled this game out.

[PeteSelman]

472. So, all was well in 2012...

And the shit hit the fan this year?

I don't see how that is. It seems less busy now than ever.

[MADem]

394. Why is ALEXA becoming less relevant or accurate?

No one uses TOOLBARS anymore--all Alexa does is record traffic of people who use their stupid toolbar.

I mean, come on -- the premise you're postulating is lame.

What is Alexa Rank?

Alexa is a company owned by Amazon that specializes in web analytics. The Alexa ranking is a listing of as many domains as they have recorded, and their relative recorded traffic. A higher Alexa rank means your site has more traffic. There’s nothing more to it than that. Alexa doesn’t judge site quality. They don’t judge subjective value. They don’t judge anything, except for a recording of traffic.

The Alexa rankings were used in the past as an indicator of the popularity of a domain. Three types of people cared about this metric. First were the competitive webmasters who would look for any excuse to consider their sites better than other sites. Second were the affiliate marketers, who would feel more confident paying out more to sites with higher Alexa ranks. Third were the domain traders, people who buy and sell domains and existing sites based on their ranks on sites like Alexa or Google’s PageRank.

Today, such basic metrics have come to mean comparatively little. Even PageRank is on the decline. Alexa, however, has one key flaw.

The Problem with Alexa Rank

Your site is very likely on Alexa’s list, and yet you don’t have any Alexa tracking code on your side. How does Alexa measure your traffic, then? The answer is that Alexa records visitors using the Alexa toolbar. Amazon has taken steps to try to make this toolbar, a browser extension, useful. Unfortunately, the age of toolbars is ending just as quickly as the age of Alexa.

http://growtraffic.com/blog/2014/09/high-alexa-rank-matter-anymore

ALEXA is not accurate nor is it relevant.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

505. Cool. So everybody decided to uninstall their Alexa toolbars at the beginning of September...

...and that's why the graph shows the drop in popularity. Got it.

[MADem]

507. No, the small subset of people with Alexa toolbars had something better to do.

Maybe they all went back to junior high school, or something?

[L0oniX]

417. Alert crews. I can't say where they are coming from or I'll get a hide ...but everyone knows.

Lots of good members have been chased off ....sad. They are trying to get rid of Wil** Woo********* Sabr*** Oct*** Ko** Man*** Scoo*** and others that make this place tolerable.

[cyberswede]

420. I keep hearing about coordinated alert "crews" but have yet to see any evidence

I don't mean to single you out, because I see the same assertion from a bunch of different posters across the spectrum, but nobody seems to have any tangible proof.

The site admins, who see all alerts and alerters, have explained that there isn't any problem with alert-stalking, or coordinated alert attacks...why are people so invested in believing there are?

Isn't it conceivable that random people on juries could support a well-written alert and vote to hide in good faith?

[Union Scribe]

430. Hmm

There's a poster (who is in this thread btw) who awhile ago let slip they'd sent an alert because they were asked to by a friend who couldn't alert (which means they either had another alert out or had been recently shot down 7-0 to leave on an alert). Separately, this same person has had a sock banned that they created to get around alert limits.

I'd say that goes to show that there is some coordination.

[LostInAnomie]

457. LALALALA!! NO IT DOESN'T LALALALA!!!

I can't hear you!

[Agschmid]

467. So do you guys take notes?

[Capt. Obvious]

482. I think we need a few more hints

to figure out who you're talking about.

[QC]

504. Hmmmm.....

[L0oniX]

458. There are some DU groups that make an effort to alert on any one who criticizes them.

[Union Scribe]

427. This thread is a marvelous inkblot test. nt

[Fumesucker]

474. Yes it is..

[jambo101]

434. Maybe people are just getting tired of forums in general.

Any other forums taking a hit in participation?

[liberal_at_heart]

441. After some of the responses on the Santa tuns away an autistic girl with pit bull

service dog, DU's popularity is definitely declining in my book.

[U4ikLefty]

443. I came here protesting the Iraq War in 2003 & don't recognize this place.

The lockstep partisanship would make the most hardened Republican blush.

Socialist, anti-war activist, and other "far left" loonies were all of the suddenly looked at with disdain by the new "cool kids "

I don't take this site seriously & haven't since 2009.

I only stay for the FEW friends that have survived the purity purges.

I want everyone to know that this place wasn't a joke when I joined in 2003...sorry that you weren't around then.

[liberal_at_heart]

449. This certainly doesn't seem to be a progressive website anymore.

[Enrique]

454. because of my pet peeves

that's gotta be it.

[Major Hogwash]

461. Simple . . too many racist trolls.

When someone says that Barack Obama, the first black President of the United States -- a Democrat who was elected President twice -- is a piece of shit used car salesman, and over 200 members of this forum agree, there are just too many racist trolls posting here for most people to want to stay and engage in so-called "discussions" about politics.

DU has become a toxic cesspool of whiners, snivelers, and racists complaining 24/7, every day of the week, every week of the month, every month of the year.
Nothing they say ever changes anything.
Nothing they say helps.
And nothing they say means anything more to me than someone farting . . it just stinks up the place.

[MADem]

510. +1

I can't help but wonder how many of those couple of hundred are registered Democrats, myself. I'll bet it's less than any of us might think.

The Russian trolls were quite the event, too--they seem to have swarmed off to other locales, of late, but I imagine they'll be back when/if Pootie's latest speech washes this way.

[Andy823]

558. Damned good post!

People that post crap like the car salesman thing, and those who rec it up, don't really want to discuss anything, they just want to stir things up and keep the arguments going. They avoid questions, they highjack other threads that are not doom and gloom, then turn them into a shit slinging fest. As you stated it really stinks the place up, and I think that's exactly what what they want!

[Odin2005]

476. Because the DLCers and Obama-Bots have driven away Progressive posters.

[Inkfreak]

481. Not enough kittehs. (nt)

[Derek V]

483. Why?

Stalinists, such as many of those commenting here. "Don't try to clarify anything I won't read it you bastard 'cause my mind is already made up!"

[Eleanors38]

485. New study: It's da NRA's fault.

[Prism]

486. Because it's an unpleasant place

Everyone's a troll. There's only one way to think about a situation, and if you do not think about it in precisely that way, you're labeled some kind of -ist. New people are shunned or viewed with deep suspicion and made to feel incredibly unwelcome. The loudest and most ideologically (or partisanly) uncompromising tend to post the most and produce the most thread heat. Total crazy is rewarded by virtue of their thread endurance.

I lurk these days, and I have no investment in DU becoming better or worse. But the epistemological closure is so severe, I often find myself seeing a story on the news and popping over to see what the totally insane ideologues are saying.

No one I know in real life is as totally off the rails ideological as a lot of DU is. And I live in Berkeley.

It's not a welcoming environment, and the sane people leave over time. (And I don't mean sane in a liberal vs moderate sense. I mean, people totally impervious to easily discernible objective facts when it is inconvenient to their ideological "narrative" or what they want an issue to be "about&quot .

My personal favorite are the ACA threads, where monied, comfortably middle class people on the internet hound the poor about what they "should" be spending their money on, how they're obviously lying about their circumstances, and how these armchair financial advisers know how you should really be living paycheck to paycheck. It's fucking hilarious. How inhumane does your ideological and partisan identity have to be that you're railing against poor people? And using the same verbiage Republicans do when talking about "welfare queens"? And then they declare themselves the Democratest of the Democrats.

K.

[QC]

502. Bravo! n/t

[Blue_Adept]

531. Yeah, there's this feeling where...

once I would pop to Free Republic to see what the insane folks were saying about something but now come here and get largely the same kind of responses.

[sibelian]

572. PRISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

((((Prism))))

I hope you're OK...?

[zappaman]

491. You better believe it!

[librechik]

497. as I recall a whole bunch of feminists left DU as a protest during the nerd wars

back last summer. Also, the toxic climate before the election was making everyone sick--a lot of folks just took a break

old timer here from 2001

I like it smaller.

[BainsBane]

503. To summarize

the bulk of responses: DU has declined in populartiy because of the presence of people who disagree with the responder's view.

Will Rogers' famous quote comes to mind: "I'm not a member of any organized party. I am a Democrat."

[Orsino]

515. Clearly, it's because of [insert pet peeve]!

Unmistakably.

[Enrique]

520. yes, but it's not because of YOUR pet peeve

it's because of MY pet peeve.

[uppityperson]

528. When shrub was pres, we had a common cause to fight against.

We lost that when Obama became president yet still had, have, the habit of snarking and fighting rather than working together positively.

The reason for us being here changed a lot and it is taking time for us to catch up and get past snark to working together again.

Simplistic view and only part of it I know, but I think it is a part of it.

[blackcrowflies]

532. they throw off too many loyal Democrats who

despise Hillary and dare to express other opinions not sanctioned by the admins. After awhile people just give up.

[randome]

548. Not that loyal if they give up so easily.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[blackcrowflies]

559. what is it about the word blocked that you don't understand?

[Caretha]

543. Because

I can't find hardly anything here anymore that made me join in 2002?

[kjones]

545. I don't come here too often anymore

My reason...I don't know, I just don't feel like it. So
probably, I just don't find it as useful as I used to.
I used to enjoy hearing diverse opinions, but it seems
that everything, even here, is so divisive that I don't
feel like bothering looking at comments, putting much
effort into sharing, or starting up a serious conversation.
Nobody seems to care about that. Instead, just a lot
of arguing and such.
Otherwise, all this place offers is news...and I can get
that a lot easier elsewhere.

[QC]

546. Most people don't like being stalked and bullied.

Odd, isn't it?

[Bobbie Jo]

551. Wow, ya think?

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Fancy that.

[ellenrr]

547. it's simple: incestuous, self-absorbed, belly-button watching. just look.

a post about DU gets (so far) over 500 replies.
a post about (for ex) an island nation going underwater due to climate change, may get 1 or 2 replies, if any.

case closed.

[B Calm]

550. Too much political correctness. PC Police are looking for something to complain about

in almost every post.

[Hotler]

553. It's moving slowly to the right and...

a big influence from the Obama can do no wrong crowd and if you don't toe the line with the Obama can do no wrong crowd you get dog piled on.

[LawDeeDah]

555. Dad's never home to watch the kids.

[Mad-in-Mo]

556. Why?

Bickering among the posters. It turns off any serious discussion.

[KoKo]

560. I wish Admins had given more Attention to Groups, here on DU.

There are some great Groups who get little attention on the Home Page. But, GD and Greatest get the most HITS for eyeballs.

That was part of the problem...but, then the fault is that the "General Audience" of DU really doesn't care to participate in "Discussion" but would rather be "Out There" putting their stuff out "At the Moment," and I think even many of us are guilty of that.

Yet if DU was truly going to be "Underground"...then the "Groups" would have Grown and Thrived.

The other thing is that after Admins gave up "The DU Conservative Funnies" featured when us "Legacy DU'ers" gravitate over here and that meant that DU Site had no Admins who could "Set a Tone" for what the site was about. And, it devolved into warring factions amongst Civil Rights Groups, War and Peace Groups and the Endless Political Campaigns with Election Wars constantly splitting people apart.

The Admins never wanted this site not to be FUN....they've said this over and over..but....we aren't living in FUN TIMES...and the Stolen Election of 2000 which Founded DU is long past and Memories are short.

DU is now a Business Enterprise and has evolved into a "MESSAGE BOARD" with some Restrictions ....but with the addition of "Discussionist" it no longer has a true Political Agenda except to Elect More & Better Democrats as "More & Better Democrats become harder and harder to find.

I think the Admins here have done a great job of "Going With the Times" and the "Drift" of the Dem Party.

They have families now and they can't be in the Trenches throwing Bricks.

They have left it "UP to US" as to how it evolves while still trying to keep discussions somewhat civil with us Jurying each other.

I think DU is a sideline...which at this point for the "Owners" it should be. We have run our course and it's up to US to make DU what we want it to be going forward. The "Owners" are out of it.

[flvegan]

562. I could tell you, but it would anger the alert-monkeys.

I hope you get, from that, explanation enough.

[sibelian]

578. Trying to have a discussion with someone on this site...

Is like extracting teeth. It's infected with troll-thinking.