HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » is there some significanc...

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 04:36 AM

is there some significance to what looks like a fly some people have crawling at the bottom of post?

thanks.

82 replies, 3854 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 82 replies Author Time Post
Reply is there some significance to what looks like a fly some people have crawling at the bottom of post? (Original post)
ellenrr Nov 2015 OP
pintobean Nov 2015 #1
Octafish Nov 2015 #62
pintobean Nov 2015 #74
Rex Nov 2015 #76
pintobean Nov 2015 #77
Rex Nov 2015 #78
cantbeserious Nov 2015 #2
Snobblevitch Nov 2015 #8
Hortensis Nov 2015 #21
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #79
uppityperson Nov 2015 #51
Orrex Nov 2015 #22
Octafish Nov 2015 #61
Orrex Nov 2015 #64
Octafish Nov 2015 #66
Orrex Nov 2015 #68
Octafish Nov 2015 #69
Orrex Nov 2015 #70
Octafish Nov 2015 #72
Orrex Nov 2015 #73
ellenrr Nov 2015 #3
cantbeserious Nov 2015 #5
MH1 Nov 2015 #53
pintobean Nov 2015 #6
ellenrr Nov 2015 #7
merrily Nov 2015 #26
pintobean Nov 2015 #48
merrily Nov 2015 #49
MH1 Nov 2015 #56
merrily Nov 2015 #57
merrily Nov 2015 #58
Donald Ian Rankin Nov 2015 #65
merrily Nov 2015 #71
TreasonousBastard Nov 2015 #10
ellenrr Nov 2015 #12
TreasonousBastard Nov 2015 #13
ellenrr Nov 2015 #14
Kilgore Nov 2015 #30
Duckhunter935 Nov 2015 #52
ileus Nov 2015 #4
Android3.14 Nov 2015 #9
ellenrr Nov 2015 #11
Lizzie Poppet Nov 2015 #45
EL34x4 Nov 2015 #15
ellenrr Nov 2015 #16
EL34x4 Nov 2015 #18
ellenrr Nov 2015 #19
cwydro Nov 2015 #36
MH1 Nov 2015 #55
ellenrr Nov 2015 #17
randome Nov 2015 #33
NCTraveler Nov 2015 #20
Orrex Nov 2015 #23
aikoaiko Nov 2015 #24
NCTraveler Nov 2015 #25
bravenak Nov 2015 #38
NCTraveler Nov 2015 #42
bravenak Nov 2015 #43
cwydro Nov 2015 #67
SidDithers Nov 2015 #27
BlueMTexpat Nov 2015 #35
bravenak Nov 2015 #54
Octafish Nov 2015 #81
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Nov 2015 #28
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #29
bigwillq Nov 2015 #31
treestar Nov 2015 #39
bigwillq Nov 2015 #59
treestar Nov 2015 #60
randome Nov 2015 #41
tavernier Nov 2015 #32
randome Nov 2015 #34
msanthrope Nov 2015 #44
randome Nov 2015 #46
msanthrope Nov 2015 #47
bravenak Nov 2015 #37
Octafish Nov 2015 #80
bravenak Nov 2015 #82
snooper2 Nov 2015 #40
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2015 #50
cherokeeprogressive Nov 2015 #63
Rex Nov 2015 #75

Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 04:45 AM

1. Some of DU

 

is infested with roaches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 10:47 AM

62. NAZIs called Jews 'vermin'

Like a roach.

IOW: It's undemocratic to demonize those with whom one disagrees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #62)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 01:22 PM

74. I was talking about an image of a bug.

 

It was a joke, fish. Some people on two sides of the primary war are using some form of it.
It doesn't take long for Godwin's law to kick in when you're around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #62)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 01:46 PM

76. Notice he is the first person to rush in here

 

to post a reply? Kewl story by him and the thread starter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #76)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 01:52 PM

77. Lol

 

We conspired, obviously.

Good one, Rex!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #77)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 01:53 PM

78. Kewl story

 

I love how you think disruptive meta threads are fun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:30 AM

2. It Is In Honor Of A DU Member Tombstoned By HRC Supporters

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:08 AM

8. Why would supporters of HRC

"tombstone" anyone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snobblevitch (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:29 AM

21. He got himself tossed out by breaking the rules,

all. by. himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 02:03 PM

79. Yeah.

 

He should have sourced Stormfront to smear a Jewish democrat. Like a clinton supporter (not banned) did.

Or he could rant and rave about how trans-women are sexual predators. Like a clinton supporter (not banned) does.

He could have advocated violence against Muslims under hte logic that "it's the only way to control them" like a (not banned) Clinton supporter did.

He could rant about how marriage isn't an important right and that gay people have enough rights already and ought ot be thankful for that much - a direct, specifically-named TOS violation - like another (unbanned) Clinton supporter has done.

He could maintain a host of sock puppet accounts used to game the alert system, another specifically-named ToS violation performed by a (not banned) Clinton supporter.

He could openly talk about stalking, harassing, and doxing other DU members in order to hound them away from the community, like a number of (not banned) Clinton supporters have done.

He could have gone on an epic flameout ranting about the inherent pathological evilness of an entire ethnic group, like another (not banned) Clinton supporter did.

Instead he linked to an article about people pledging to use Bernie Sanders as a write-in candidate, and got bounced out instantly for it.

No one's saying it's not his fault. An argument could be made that his linking to such an article was a TOS violation. The problem is the chasm of difference between the treatment of Sanders supporters vs. Clinton supporters on this subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snobblevitch (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:47 PM

51. Admin banned someone. Admin supports Clinton. Eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:30 AM

22. Ah, yes. Another sad victim of The Third Way Conspiracy®

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #22)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 10:46 AM

61. like accusing someone of racism, homophobia and anti-Semitism without even one link of proof.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #61)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 10:58 AM

64. If you don't like being associated with racists, homophobes, and anti-Semites...

Then stop linking to them for your source material.

Also, since you've clearly sought me out to reply here in this thread with an irrelevant and flaccid attempt at insult, you should perhaps be careful when you're accusing people of being obsessive and delusional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #64)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:12 AM

66. You say that, but you don't show where I've done that.

That makes you a smear artist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #66)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:21 AM

68. Sid has already done so--take it up with him

What the fuck is your problem, by the way? You blunder into this thread simply to spray your musk all over the place? Isn't it enough that your fawning acolytes praise your content-free posts every time you vomit them onto the forum?

What a small and empty existence you must endure, if you can't tolerate criticism of your ideas.


Unlike you, I don't presume to diagnose mental disorders, but like anyone else I can speculate on the factors that drive you to such pettiness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #68)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:24 AM

69. He hasn't either. So that makes Sid a smear artist, as well.

That's what people who say what isn't true do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #69)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:27 AM

70. Well, you're a demonstrated liar and a thread-stalker

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #70)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:59 AM

72. Show.

Otherwise, it's clear who's lying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #72)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 12:06 PM

73. I have, and you are.

Show me where I'm wrong. Hell, enlist your fawning acolytes to help you, if you want.
What's the point of having an uncritical mass of followers if you can't get them to do your bidding?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:41 AM

3. I don't understand either of these responses...

you honor someone by having a fly cross your post?
and if no one understands it, except the insiders - then how does it honor?


well, no matter - not of any great importance, I am just a curious person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:43 AM

5. The DU Member Also Had A Fly - It Was Their Trademark - It Drove The HRC Supporters Crazy

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:50 PM

53. For the record, it's not only HRC Supporters that it drives crazy.

I only came into this thread for the potential entertainment value, but will shortly be leaving to give my eyes a rest. That f*cking bug is very annoying on serious threads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:49 AM

6. L0oniX was PPRed for encouraging DUers not to vote in the general

 

election if Hillary wins the nomination (a TOS violation). He had that annoying bug in his sig line. The bug became a part of the primary wars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:51 AM

7. oh I see. the bug is some kind of resistance symbol. ok. thx. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:02 AM

26. UNTRUE. That's how the alert may have read, but those are not the facts.

L0oniX copied and pasted, without any comment and with a link, an article from a liberal website that suggested Sanders supporters, AS A PRIMARY STRATEGY,* sign a pledge to write in Sanders in the general. The pledge, of course, was non-binding. The jury voted to leave and L0oniX was PPR'd anyway.


*That signing the pledge was a primary strategy was expressly stated right in the article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to pintobean (Reply #48)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:37 PM

49. Dude, here's the post. Tell me how I mischaracterized it so I'll, you know,

see the error of my ways and not mischaracterize the contents of another post the same way in the future.*

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7316073


Or are you trying to tell me that something posted on another board alters the facts of what actually happened on this board months later? Good to know!



*I see that the post was hidden, but I am not sure if that happened via a jury or in connection with the banning. I thought someone had posted the jury results voting to leave, but I could be mistaken. Either way, the contents of post fit my description of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:03 PM

56. I just went to the link in the post, and it seems very clear that it discourages breaking the pledge

even if Sanders doesn't get the nomination. (Go to the FAQ link on the Wordpress site that Loonix linked to in his post).

Maybe Loonix did not understand this, but I read it closely and it's pretty clear to me that it is meant to be a serious pledge.

The Admins had stated that if you successfully convinced them that you really meant to not vote for the Dem nominee in the GE, that would likely result in you being banned. Most people throw out a statement here and there that's taken as a non-serious whine, so they don't get banned for it. But shilling a website that someone has clearly put A LOT of attention into, that clearly says "pledge" and discourages breaking that pledge, is pretty convincing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MH1 (Reply #56)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:12 PM

57. Serious, shmerious. It's not legally binding. I mean, Hillary supporters laugh at internet polls,

and you're telling me an internet pledge is supposed to be serious?

The Admins had stated that if you successfully convinced them that you really meant to not vote for the Dem nominee in the GE, that would likely result in you being banned.


In which part of a cut and paste from another website did L0oniX so much as hint at how he or she personally intended to vote?

I've seen posters here flat out state they will not vote for Hillary come hell or high water, including if she's the nominee. And the operative part of the admins statement has been that people may change their minds once the nominees have actually been chosen. Please tell me how L0onix's post was more convincing than those statements.


Sorry, it you don't see that banning as selective and not consistent with past actions, then, IMO, something is wrong with your perception.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MH1 (Reply #56)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:45 PM

58. BTW, I just checked the link I provided.

In error, I had provided a link to L0onix's final DU post. This is the link to the fateful post that supposedly caused the banning. http://www.democraticunderground.com/128068973

And here is what is said at the source L0onix linked about the reason for the pledge:

Rationale: Bernie is the underdog, and he’s going to be vastly outspent by Secretary Clinton. 96% of the time, the candidate spending the most money wins a race. If he’s going to secure the Democratic nomination, leverage and insurance will be needed. 1,000,000+ voters pledged to write-in Senator Sanders will be a compelling argument for some Democratic primary voters. Bloomberg Politics reports, “in Iowa and New Hampshire, with four-fifths of likely Democratic voters in both states saying they think Clinton is destined to be the nominee.” A write-in campaign is designed to undermine that “destiny.” Call it arm twisting, call it “breaking eggs,” call it compellence; we call it leverage on Democratic primary voters and insurance against corrupted super delegates “pledged” to another candidate before one primary vote is cast. A write-in strategy is an innovative idea to help a candidate secure a party’s nomination. We are convinced that if this strategy is not employed, there is very little possibility Senator Sanders will secure the nomination


Clearly, the reason for the pledge was leverage for the primary. Obviously, you don't get leverage in the primary by negating the pledge in your next sentence. but the reason for the pledge was very clearly stated and equally clearly about the primary.

Also, let me get this straight: Posting an excerpt from another website with no comment = shilling for that website now? Just how far to the other side of the looking glass has DU gone?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #26)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:04 AM

65. Here's what Skinner had to say on the subject:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598967

Based on the Terms of Service, we have grounds to ban anyone who states that they do not intend to vote for the Democratic nominee in any general election. There is a popular misconception that the "Vote for Democrats" rule only applies after a nominee has been chosen, but that is not correct. The use of the term "never" is intentional in the section you quoted above.

So the next question, of course, is why so many people have been permitted to claim here on DU that they won't vote for the Democratic nominee, and have not been banned for saying so. The reason is because the admins believe that most people who say this in the context of a contested presidential primary don't actually mean it. Some of them say it because they think threatening to withhold one's vote might be a persuasive argument in favor of their preferred primary candidate. (It isn't.) And in other cases they say it because they really believe it at that moment when they are caught up in the heat of the primary campaign, but once the primary is over they suck it up and do the right thing. We have seen this over and over again on DU after previous contested primary campaigns when the vast, vast majority of people went on to support the nominee.

The DU Terms of Service actually gives a nod to this and contains a clause that a certain amount of ambivalence toward Democrats is understandable:


During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them.

I want to be clear that that the Terms of Service remain unchanged, and members are still permitted to express their ambivalence about voting for the eventual nominee. The DU administrators have been allowing members a significant amount of leeway in our interpretation of that clause, but is a limit to how far we are willing to go.

Unfortunately, there are some people here who who say they won't support the nominee and actually won't. As we explained above, our feeling is that we want to give people the benefit of the doubt. But if you convince us that you actually mean it and you really aren't going to support the nominee, then we're going to treat you like you actually mean it. That person who started the OP telling people to sign the pledge that they won't support the Democratic nominee was very convincing, and is no longer a member of DU.

From the Terms of Service:

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office.

That's the bottom line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #65)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:43 AM

71. Yes, I know. How that applies (or not) to what L0oniX actually posted is the issue,

not what Skinner said in general. ( I believe the particular statement you quoted was made in response to a question by randys1 and not in connection with L0oniX's post.) L0onix's fateful post, being a copy and paste about a primary strategy, said nothing at all about how L0onix intended to vote in the general. o

I am not sure what your specific point is about L0oniX's hidden post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:35 AM

10. Actually, it could be important...

As you might have noticed, DU gets completely insane around primary time. This time the Hillary and Bernie people seem worse than factions have been in the past, although that my be my imagination.

Anyway, LOonix had the bug crawling around his sig line, and after he was thrown off, presumably for being too anti-Hillary, some added the crawling bug in solidarity.

But, others changed the gif to show the bug being swatted, not exactly a friendly gesture.

Just the tip of the iceberg about how how nasty it can get around here. The place is much easier to read if you trash the primary and candidate forums.

There was once some fantasy about DU working together to get Democrats elected. I wonder what happened to that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:51 AM

12. if someone wants to get a particular person elected, there are lots of things to do--

petitions, coffees, emails, phone calls,
strategize, focus groups,

a lot more I'm sure.

casting shit on DU is not one of them, lol...

but hey, if that is someone's thang, go ahead and have a ball.


Repeat after me:
THIS IS AN INTERNET FORUM. THIS IS NOT REAL LIFE.

It is really important to know the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:11 AM

13. Oh, I agree absolutely, I didn't mean...

this was important in the grand scheme of things. Just here on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #13)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:14 AM

14. oh. I see. yes.. many people here have a hugely inflated idea of the importance of DU.

it's kinda funny....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:19 AM

30. BRAVO!!!

Well said!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:49 PM

52. You might make the same quest for the ones that

 

Have the fly swatted in their dig line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:42 AM

4. Someone told me someone was banned at some time.

and they had that goofy bug thing....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:26 AM

9. It's a mystery.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:48 AM

11. "Communicating with symbols provides unambiguous signature of our modernity"

so says some anthropologist..


hummmm....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:39 AM

45. Reams and reams of words written on that very subject.

 

Including my own dissertation... Semiotics: it's not just for breakfast any more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:15 AM

15. That annoying, crawling fly

 

Motivated me to turn off signatures in my settings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EL34x4 (Reply #15)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:16 AM

16. oh, PLEASE tell me how to do that.

that will save me a LOT of annoyance.
thanks.
I didn't know that could be done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #16)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:19 AM

18. Select "My Account" in the upper right-hand corner.

 

Select "remove" on "User signature lines on posts"

I learned about this from the other thread on the crawling flies. Unfortunately, all signatures are now blocked but that's the price to pay to get that annoying, distracting stupid fly off your screen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EL34x4 (Reply #18)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:23 AM

19. lol. I agree. and I don't mind having all signature lines removed.

thx!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #19)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 09:23 AM

36. Yeah, I'm not on either side of the bug people - the flies or the swatters.

But I had to turn off sig lines too. I'm not fond of flies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EL34x4 (Reply #18)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:54 PM

55. Thank you! for some reason I had not found that before.

I thought it was only for star members so didn't look very hard.

DU is much better now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EL34x4 (Reply #15)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:18 AM

17. I think I found it. "Account" . "remove user signature". we shall see if that is it.

I thought that referred to my own signature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EL34x4 (Reply #15)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:42 AM

33. Me, too.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:27 AM

20. It's a display of solidarity for some.

 

It was a sig line of a poster here who worked against getting democrats elected. They were banned for ratfucking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #20)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:39 AM

23. As a matter of fact, I believe that is the formal term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #20)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:42 AM

24. All loonix did was post about someone else's petition about not voting for HRC



Not exactly ratfucking, but I can see why overprotective HRC fans wanted him gone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #24)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 07:53 AM

25. Overprotective HRC fans. Love it.

 

Its funny at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #25)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 10:55 AM

38. Is that person blaming admin?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #38)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:31 AM

42. I believe so.

 

Interesting to me that they are standing up for someone on this board who was fighting against women's rights, minority rights, sensible gun legislation, unions, etc.. That is what said posters was doing by advocating for a policy that would DIRECTLY benefit republicans. And now this poster is saying it is overzealous Clinton "fans." Their intentions are becoming more clear by the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #42)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:33 AM

43. Yep.

 

I remember when their agenda became clear to me. I knew it was a matter of time before they woukd reveal themselves to all and sundry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #20)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 11:18 AM

67. Good point. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:06 AM

27. Three threads will give you the story...

Here's the one posted by Loonix, that got him banned:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128068973

Here's the ATA thread where Skinner explained why the post was a TOS violation:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598967

Here's why some posters have the bug in their sig line, to protest the banning:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027321381

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #27)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 09:21 AM

35. I love what you've done

with that bug!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #27)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:52 PM

54. Great post!

 

Flies are disruptors in my household. I try to get rid of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #27)

Fri Nov 27, 2015, 02:11 PM

81. You're like an authority for Central Scrutiny.

To whom do you report?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:17 AM

28. It was a response to unseemly gravedancing by the HRC crowd after a long time site user

who happened to be a Bernie supporter got ppr'ed for posting an OP about what some folks offsite are doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:18 AM

29. It's a thing the 8th Graders are doing for Spirit Week!

 

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:22 AM

31. The reaction to the bug

 



Says a lot more than the bug itself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigwillq (Reply #31)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:02 AM

39. It's just a joke

It is funny to see the high and mighty declare themselves way above it. And the super sensitive who find it so bothersome they have to turn the sig lines off. I'd hate to be that sensitive. Though I shouldn't say that, as someone may have/claim a real condition affected. If that's the case, I would say we should turn them off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #39)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 06:53 AM

59. Congrats on 60,000 posts!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigwillq (Reply #59)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 10:44 AM

60. I didn't even notice that!!!!

Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigwillq (Reply #31)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:29 AM

41. When my daughters accidentally turn on subtitles and we don't need them...

 

...I turn them off. It doesn't bother them but it does me. My mind is automatically drawn -for just a fraction of a second- to reading those words and it's distracting.

Same for the obnoxious bug GIF. It is distracting.

Same for poorly designed web sites where every few pixels is some meaningless splash of color. They do that to draw your attention because it works.

Same for poorly written code.

But unneeded subtitles, unneeded bugs and unneeded graphics are all the same -distracting. And they do nothing but turn a good number of people against those who think it's 'funny' to be obnoxious.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:24 AM

32. Reminds me of my favorite disgusting joke:

Did you hear about the maggots that made love in dead Ernest?

Maggots... Flies... Get it??



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 08:43 AM

34. See your eye doctor. There are no bugs here.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #34)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:38 AM

44. don't laugh. But given my eye condition, I can't see that f****** bug. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #44)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:42 AM

46. Sorry! I laughed!

 

But you knew I would.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #46)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:49 AM

47. I knew you would. I laughed that the ratfucker was rightly tombstoned.

 

And anyone who has a problem with that particular tombstoning can take it up directly with admin. Anyone who has a problem with the term rat fucker can look up its precise historical context. It refers to someone who is deliberately advocating for people not to vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 10:54 AM

37. We need more Raid. And foggers.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #37)

Fri Nov 27, 2015, 02:10 PM

80. You've been here two years and you know who to eliminate?

Who in particular do you want to exterminate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #80)

Fri Nov 27, 2015, 08:56 PM

82. CT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 11:04 AM

40. It is a tween thing

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Wed Nov 25, 2015, 05:44 PM

50. I have it, but I only speak for myself,

 

Last edited Wed Nov 25, 2015, 06:30 PM - Edit history (1)

As protest in the very unequal enforcement of the rules. I could have as my dog that line from Animal farm about some pigs being more equal than others, but the fly that Lonix flew for years is similar.

Alas the discussion of this ahem serious problem here is currently starting. That is good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 10:51 AM

63. It's nothing more than a moving black dot. Some see what they WANT to see.

 

Yawn...

It's a moving black dot. Nothing more. Remember that you're looking at a computer screen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Original post)

Thu Nov 26, 2015, 01:46 PM

75. Why are animated graphics in the sigline all the sudden an issue on DU? Never have been before.

 

Kewl story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread