Hahahaha

[In_The_Wind]

[femmocrat]

1. U R 2 naughty!

[In_The_Wind]

2. Someone agrees with you.

I just got a PM from a friend who was on the jury over this thread.

Obviously someone got their knickers in a knot.

[femmocrat]

4. Uh oh! But --- I guess they didn't hide it!

You are already in deep doo-doo with those manic alerters, ya' know!

[In_The_Wind]

5. Oh well ~~~ >>>

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Very inappropriate.

Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Personal attack from Alerter: "The person who sent the alert wrote: Oh, she does love to skate the line of taste and trash, doesn't she. Everybody loves a gal who just wants to have fun."

Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: WTF....Now that's funny.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: If you don't like the OP put them on ignore.

Like the alert said: [img][/img]

[femmocrat]

7. Well, that is interesting!

I agree with Juror #6.

As my mother used to say, "They are just jealous"!

And as the Romans used to say, Illegitimi non carborundum!!!

[In_The_Wind]

12. I wish they would but me on ignore but I must be too entertaining.

As my mother used to say, "They are just jealous"!

I think your mother is right.

[Wait Wut]

11. Why can't I ever get on the good juries?

Love #2's response. 'Personal attack from Alerter'.

Yep.

Your penance shall be:

Say 5 Hail Taxis and 7 Our Feathers.
Drink 2 shots of tequilla followed by one cheap beer while hanging from a chandelier singing the 'Star Spangled Banner' (it is Flag Day, after all).



P.S. Video must follow.

[In_The_Wind]

13. You're not on my Jury Blacklist.

Personal attack from Alerter
Needs to get a life ^^^ so they won't worry about me.

[MADem]

21. That just seems odd to be so censorious in the lounge.

Why not just trash the thread and march on smartly?

I wonder if the sign said "I got a diddle lick" the alerter would be equally outraged.

Oh well. Alerters who do that sort of frivolous alerting might not be aware that their alerts don't disappear. The admins have the capability to look very closely at what a poster does, down to all their alerts and their petty little revenges.

It's not a secret to them.

[In_The_Wind]

24. Sigh. Everything you've said makes more sense that what is going on.

I must be really something very special to the DUer who continues to alert on my post/threads.

We were wondering if I were a man posting the same things would the alerts happen.

[MiddleFingerMom]

57. Ahem.

.
.
.
Hope.
.
.
.
Hoops.
.
.
.
That is all.
.
.
.

[In_The_Wind]

58. No longer my problem to watch for.

I am not Hope Hoops nor are you.
Haven't seen HH since before my term with MIRT ended.

FWIW ... My advice is: Get over it my stalker. I'm not letting you run me away from DU. Nor will you (my stalker) cyber bully harass me into whining over your stupidity. Lighten up my stalker.



Thanks MFM

[Locut0s]

15. WTF? Boring, bland, puritans...

Whoever flagged this or voted to hide it, feel free to put me on ignore too, cause I'm sure sooner or later I'd offend you too.

[In_The_Wind]

17. There are a few on DU who really really should stop looking at my post.

Girls just wanna have fun, more like girls want attention and are resorting to sexual innuendo - constantly - to get it.

Laughing over someone alerting on her post and posting the results is META material, not lounge material.

They seem to dislike ME. IMO: Whoever they are they would be happier if put me on full ignore.
(cause I'm not going to change who I am to please them) Then they won't be offended. Cause this excerpt was from the 2nd alert at 6:36 PM on this thread. Also IMO: The jury is doing their best to show the DUer doing the alert is overreacting.

[MADem]

22. Someone doesn't get that "META" prohibitions only apply to the OP.

We can get as META as we want downthread, and it's not the job of the hosts to deal with that--hosts deal with the OP, and nothing more.

Nothing META about this OP...!

[In_The_Wind]

28. Again ... Thank you. I really do try to start funny threads.

[Kali]

40. actually a jury could decide to hide meta posts anywhere in a thread

replies are not in the purview of hosts but if a jury got an alert and the reason was because the post was too "meta" they could decide to hide it based on community standards - those being that admins obviously didn't like the way open meta discussions tended to go and have closed the forum and told hosts to lock an negative meta OPs. I can't recall seeing any alerts like that, but it could be done. and maybe should be.

interesting that you are here having a meta discussion when you have repeatedly said you don't like the Lounge.

[ileus]

33. jury results...

I've shared this with everyone today...I'm the #5 juror

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Oh, she does love to skate the line of taste and trash, doesn't she. Everybody loves a gal who just wants to have fun.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 14, 2013, 09:19 AM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Very inappropriate.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Personal attack from Alerter: "The person who sent the alert wrote: Oh, she does love to skate the line of taste and trash, doesn't she. Everybody loves a gal who just wants to have fun."
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: WTF....Now that's funny.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: If you don't like the OP put them on ignore.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[In_The_Wind]

34. Thank you juror #5.

Everyone on this thread agrees with you.

[MADem]

41. Well, the jurors have plenty to alert on, there!

The dismissive use of "gal," the implication without evidence that the poster is a "girl who wants to have fun"--i.e. a "party" girl, which suggests prostitution. Impugning her motive to provide people with a cerebral and funny brain twister and suggesting that she is tasteless and trashy--if that's not a personal attack, from start to finish, what is?

[In_The_Wind]

48. Sheesh! That so went totally over my head. Ouch! Cause I'm not a "party" girl ...

nor am I tasteless or trashy.

[Jeff R]

3. Funny

How are brain corrects what we thought we saw.....

[In_The_Wind]

6. I'm in trouble again.

[img][/img] [img][/img]

[Jeff R]

8. Wondering

About that. Thought it was kinda cute myself. Guess it depends on your sense of humor perspective. Hmmm

[Loryn]

9. I read it all wrong.

The brain is a strange thing, no?

I don't find it innappropriate. What's wrong with people who don't like a little chuckler in the morning?

[In_The_Wind]

14. I thought it was funny.

[marzipanni]

36. It's scary anymore! "Is this too titillating for the lounge, or not?"

[In_The_Wind]

49. It shouldn't be.

[Aristus]

10. Are you allowed to keep those as pets?

And how often do you pet them?

[Locut0s]

16. Umm...

I'm assuming the amount of petting is correlated with the amount of wetness Strange pets these

[In_The_Wind]

18. Woke up this morning feeling like a total wuss cause everything hurt.

All I wanted was a laugh not a pet.

I don't know How often does one pet a wussy?

[pink-o]

19. Really? You went to jury on that? WTH is DU coming to, anyway?

The joke isn't even about the double entendre, but about getting the second sentence wrong--oh, and hey, my explaining it just makes it that much funnier, right? Can we all go home now?

I swear, I've been here since 2002, and I always expect the DU navel gazing and hair-splitting that devolves a lot of threads. But the objections for a benign joke are a whole new level of weird here.

It's called NUANCE, people. Remember, what GW Bush never understood...?

[In_The_Wind]

20. Not once but twice.

The really odd thing is: I still have the same 12 star members ignoring me for weeks.

I guess what you are saying is: The alerter is a dumb as GW Bush.

That's rich!
Thank you!

[Callmecrazy]

26. This OP totally got me...

On the first line... and the second.
I thought it was very cerebral.
And to the alerter: Lighten the fuck up. You sound pathetic.

[In_The_Wind]

29. Callmecrazy but I thought it was perfect for the way I felt this morning.

Thanks for the DU Rec

[Callmecrazy]

31. You're welcome, Ma'am. nt

[Kali]

42. post can only go to a jury once

any subsequent alerts on a juried post just get a reply with the jury vote results and no comments

if your post went twice somebody should report that as a glitch, but I only see one set of results in the thread (though repeated)???

[In_The_Wind]

50. The 1st alert was on the OP. The 2nd was on a post.

At Fri Jun 14, 2013, 06:28 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Oh well ~~~ >>>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1018&pid=411020

REASON FOR ALERT:



ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Girls just wanna have fun, more like girls want attention and are resorting to sexual innuendo - constantly - to get it.

Laughing over someone alerting on her post and posting the results is META material, not lounge material.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 14, 2013, 06:36 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Juries don't handle SoP alerts, host do. We just handle disgruntled alerts.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I think the OP and the alerted post are in good fun. (I'll also admit that it took me four tries before I got the OP.) If this is a personal matter that was brought into a new thread, please take it back there.
Oh, and META is gone so what better place than the lounge to discuss things?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

[Kali]

51. ah, ok that makes more sense

[MADem]

23. One of the jury members could alert on the jury results.

Send a "WTF" to the admins about the alerter...?

It wouldn't do anything, necessarily, but it might put a reactionary on their radar...particularly if they're doing this a lot.

[BlueStreak]

37. A little off topic, but I'd like to see an improvement to the alert system

Most of the time, I think the system works very well, but there is a small minority here who aggressively use the alert system as a sword rather than a shield. And they get away with their bullying behavior because there is no downside to their bullying. The downside is all to the person whose post is being reviewed.

I believe a small adjustment to the system would make this perfect. In the span of 90 days, if a person requests 5 alerts that are NOT upheld, they should lose their transparency and they should also lose their ability to make any further alerts until the bad ones expire.

That would be fair and balanced, I think. It would force a person to think a little bit before hitting the alert button. In most causes it is better to just ignore and move on, or actually put the other party on "ignore" if the one is that offended, or to reply publicly to the thread with a thoughtful response, asking the poster to consider editing their post. I think most people would oblige.

[MADem]

39. Interesting idea....I don't think the admins will buy off, though.

I think they want us to "self-regulate" and let the standards "evolve." Of course, part and parcel of all that includes the ability to say something to them about what look like childishly meanspirited alerts.

This OP doesn't call out anyone, it isn't a personal insult, it's a play on words in a lighthearted 'fun' forum that adults should be able to handle. It was a bogus alert, IMO.

[BlueStreak]

43. And a person could only be offended if they have a dirty mind. :)

[MADem]

56. Very good point--the alert says more about the alerter's "filthy proclivities" than it does

about the poster of the message!!

[Kali]

45. if an alerter gets a 6-0 Leave result

Last edited Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:06 AM - Edit history (1)

they are blocked from alerting on anything else for 24 hours. in this case it looks like 2 jurors plus the alerter found the post to violate community standards, what happens when the votes are 2 to 4 and 3-3?

Admins have stated repeatedly that there aren't many alert abusers - and they can see them in any case. Plus, it IS the main way members can mold the community standards. Ignore is certainly another option, but the whole point of the members setting the standards is allowing them to alert and judge the posts of their peers. I think it works fairly well (even though I totally suck at alerts, and I am on MIRT! )

[BlueStreak]

46. I guess it all comes down to what one calls "abuse"

For me, it is pretty easy to tell when somebody is doing an alert out of spite or vindictiveness, rather than out of a genuine concern about the quality of the forum.

In my experience, it is pretty unusual for all 6 to say "leave it". usually there is at least one juror that takes the attitude "I don't want to get in the middle of this. Just hide it and move on." But that approach rewards the alert bullies -- which I agree are a small minority.

[Kali]

47. heh

I have been locked out of alerting at least three or four times in this current MIRT session, it happens

you know when you get those alerts that say something like troll, let MIRT have a look? yeah, sometimes people don't believe it.

[bluesbassman]

25. The trouble with Tribbles...

If you feed them after midnight, or get them wet...

Wait, that's Mogwais... nevermind.



















BTW, I loved the OP.

[In_The_Wind]

30. You're awesome bluesbassman!

Sorry about not answering your PM. I didn't have any good news about my life to share but I was really happy to hear about your life.

[BlueStreak]

27. Got me on both lines. I wonder if men are more likely

to read that wrong.

(I have an excuse. I'm mildly lysdexic.)

[In_The_Wind]

32. I think we all read it wrong at first.

Only mildly makes life more interesting, right?

[BlueStreak]

35. I guess it does.

My case is strong enough that I notice it regularly, but not so bad that it prevents me from doing what I need to do.

[In_The_Wind]

52. I'm glad it doesn't cause you any real problems.

Sorry it's annoying you.

[BlueStreak]

55. I've lived with it for 50 years. It is like bad eyesight.

One doesn't know any different. It is just the way things are. Not really annoying. I just have to proofread everything, which is a good habit anyway. And I can't read nearly as fast as most people. Because of that, I've never read for pleasure. That is probably the biggest impact. And I am an atheist because I just can't worship a dog. Compared to what others have to deal with, this is nothing.

But I feel like quite a chump for falling into the trap -- especially the second line. I had to read that 5 times before I realized the words were out of order.

I sent it to a psychiatrist friend. He loved it. I bet he can use it in his therapy sessions as an illustration of how we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

[MrScorpio]

38. I love it! nt

[In_The_Wind]

53. Thanks

[Lady Freedom Returns]

44. Made my SO take another look!

[In_The_Wind]

54. It's just one of those things ya gotta be sure about.