Imagine what she'll do as President

[FourScore]

[oldandhappy]

1. an outstanding act of unity

[Liberal_in_LA]

2. Good stuff

[silvershadow]

3. Bump to expose political terrorism by terrorism's exact definition we use to fight the war against

it.

[writes3000]

4. This is a ridiculous accusation with no proof. It's gross.

[Marrah_G]

6. There is proof and this is shameful.

[writes3000]

8. Where is the factual proof that this was caused by a Hillary supporter?

I'll wait.

[Marrah_G]

11. Go look it up while you are waiting.

I'm not being paid and I'm not writing some paper for school. If the actions of "correct the record" bother you, which I don't think they do, Then you can go google it.

[writes3000]

13. I'm not the one making unfounded, unproven accusations. Innocent until proven guilty.

Strange concept, I know.

[Marrah_G]

14. We aren't in a court of law

Hillary's pac is pulling some nasty, slimy shit.

[writes3000]

16. I see people who want that to be true. I'm not seeing proof though.

Mostly, I see a lot of people willing to believe anything to justify their over the top hate and victim status.

[Ino]

15. Here's your proof

[writes3000]

19. And how do we know that's a real Hillary supporter and not a fake one?

[Ino]

21. What? Do you think it's a Bernie supporter...

pretending to be a Hillary supporter, and taking down Bernie sites?? Seriously?!

Look...
https://twitter.com/search?q=casey%20champagne&src=typd

[840high]

51. How do we know it's not a Hillary supporter.

[Matt_in_STL]

55. His photo with Hillary isn't a giveaway?

[sheshe2]

33. Lol!

Proof Positive!!!!!

[sheshe2]

27. If there was link, it already would have been posted.

PS, only a FB admin can take down a site, Hillary and Correct the Record cannot.

[nolawarlock]

9. The only proof I've seen ...

... is some Hillary person claiming to have gotten a group shut down for credible threat of violence. Facebook barely ever removes anything. Trust me when I tell you I should know. I once had at least a thousand people report an harassing post before and it didn't do diddly squat. If they remove a group that's been being flagged for credible threats of violence, then there almost certainly were credible threats of violence. Whether those people were true Bernie supporters or if they just joined the group to sabotage it, the fact remains they were allowed to be in those groups saying who knows what.

I want to see the actual posts that caused those alerts to happen. If they don't show what I suspect they will, then I'll be impressed with this as an issue, but I've had enough experience with Facebook to know that this is yet another attempt to slander Hillary.

[Lancero]

18. As one of their commenters called it "LOL "CREDIBLE""

Note the air quotes. If you've seen any of the Austin Powers movies, you'll know what the air quotes are implying.

[nolawarlock]

22. Say what you will

But I have a lot of experience in this particular area. It's easier to meet the Pope (just ask Bernie!) than it is to get Facebook to shut something down. If they got shut down for credible threat of violence, then I'm willing to bet there was one.

I can't wait to see how this blackout affects tomorrow. I have a feeling I'll be popping open the Cristal.

[Lancero]

23. If their were credible threats, why were the groups later reactivated? Hm?

6 groups got taken down for that reason, but were later put back up.

The groups getting disabled automatically after hitting a certain reports threshold. Facebook doesn't have people monitoring reports 24/7, so in order to protect people groups can be locked automatically after a certain number of reports.

It's done with good intentions, to protect the community from blatantly inappropriate content, but it's open to misuse. Report swarming is the most apparent.

In any event, 6 of the most popular Bernie groups getting shut down on the same day isn't a coincidence. Spread it out amongst a week or so, it wouldn't look odd. But six on one day, all within a close time-span? Yeah. If you think that's a coincidence, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

[nolawarlock]

24. It's possible that the admins reached out ...

... to say, hey this was one freak and we got rid of him. I don't have all of the details but the one detail I do have is that you have a better chance of having tea with the Queen of England than you do getting Facebook to delete something.

[Lancero]

25. Except none of them have said that. Just that the group was reenabled after a review.

FB reviewed the groups, and found just cause to believe that the reports filed against the group were bogus.

Some reading - http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/bernie-sanders-facebook-groups-removed-banned-deleted-why-hillary-clinton-attack-censorship-which/

Facebook has automated systems that remove people and pages based on flags and reports sent from other Facebook users. Once an actual person reviews that removal and determines it was fraudulent, they can reinstate the page. An atheist group’s Facebook page experienced exactly this after Facebook was inundated with flags from people who cited the page as being guilty of “bullying.” These were later determined to be false citations from people who didn’t like the page, and the page was reinstated.

Screenshots have surfaced pointing to a possible coordinated attempt at “mass reporting” the Bernie Sanders pages for false violations.

...Once a “real” person at Facebook is able to review what’s happening, the groups will likely be reinstated, and many already have. But their deletion points to a coordinated online attack on Bernie Sanders Facebook groups and their online activism. Facebook may need to review their system and the automatic removal of groups based solely on mass flags and reports.

So, exactly as I said earlier. Report bombing.

Honestly, if it wasn't for a couple of Hillary FB groups jumping for joy at this and claiming responsibility for it I'd call this as a RW group pulling a false flag. It still might be one in any case, but the number of Hillary supporters jumping for joy at this is just making them look like they did it.

Still though, what do you think? Were the initial disablings legitimate, or the result of a RW troll group trying to do a false flag in a attempt to fan up the flames between both groups?

[nolawarlock]

28. I would have to see something a court and a jury actually validated ...

... before I'd believe much of anything. I had over a thousand people report a page that had abuse far worse than anything deemed societally acceptable and Facebook did nothing. So, I doubt very much that there isn't more to this story than the obvious.

I had nothing to do with it and I'm totally jumping for joy. After being called a sock, a paid troll, delusional, an idiot, an enemy, slow, and alert-stalked and banned for absolute trivial posts that were far less incendiary than anything they were responding to for weeks, anything bad that happens to Bernie as a candidate is probably going to make me pick up a glass of Cristal. I didn't actually hate Bernie Sanders until I came to this site. I just thought he was a bit of an amateur who didn't seem very concerned about small businesses in his zeal to attack corporations. Now, on the other hand, when he finally loses, I am actually going to go out to the swankiest restaurant in New Orleans and get me a staircase of caviar.

[Lancero]

31. And rather than holding yourself to a higher standard, you embrace the hate.

Congrats, you're now part of the problem you complain so much about.

[nolawarlock]

32. "higher standard"

Please. There's no high ground in a system that's completely rigged to favor one candidate's supporters while the others are trampled on constantly.

[Lancero]

34. And it's attitudes like that that are fanning the flames higher.

Like it or not, you're going to have to HAVE to work with Sander supporters in the future. Doesn't matter which candidate gets picked, both sides will need to work together.

[nolawarlock]

35. I don't have to work with anyone.

I'm perfectly fine going back to my own daily concerns outside of politics. I can't imagine why anyone would want to be subjected to the kind of abuse that's an everyday occurrence here.

[Lancero]

37. So, PUMA then?

Fair enough. But still, it's odd that you said this place is so abusive, claim to not know why anyone would want to be subjected to the abuse here, and yet... You continue to show up here, and get subjected to the 'abuse'.

Me thinks you're embellishing something.

[nolawarlock]

38. If I recall, the PUMA people were planning to sit out their vote.

I have every intention of voting, so I'm neither a PUMA or a Bernie or Buster. I just don't intend to beg the support of people who have declared us an "enemy," and yes, that word was used. If I'm your enemy, go sit at some other table. Now as for whether Hillary courts your votes, that's on her and she absolutely should. I just have no interest in it. Now, if less hostile Bernie supporters want to talk about how to compromise on the platform (which none of us have any real power over anyway), or ways we can support which ever candidate acquires the nomination, I'm all for that, but I think those less hostile Bernie supporters are far and few between.

[Lancero]

39. Ah well, back to the disabled groups - FB has said that it was the result of a report bombing.

Want to reconsider your earlier stance on it now?

[nolawarlock]

40. If it was actually report bombing ...

... then my stance is this:

If it's ok for Bernie supporters to exploit the flaws in the jury system of DU, which they do with reckless abandon, then I'm ok with Hillary supporters exploiting the flaws of Facebook. All's fair in love and war right?

In actuality, I don't think either situation is fair, but then it's hard for me to muster any righteous indignation about the Facebook issue when I've seen the way Bernie supporters exploit the failings of the software on this site on a daily (if not hourly) basis.

[Lancero]

44. FB issued statement saying that it was the result of 'automated processes being applied incorrectly'

In laymans terms, that translates to - exactly what I've been calling it before - a report bombing.

That said though, Sanders supporters aren't exploiting anything in the jury system. The site just has a higher composition of Sanders supporters to Hillary supporters. That's not exploiting the jury system, that's site makeup.

Exploiting the system would be doing what this person admitted to - http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=115161

[nolawarlock]

46. That's exactly what Bernie supporters are doing daily ...

Just based on the hides I got, it was clear for all but one actually legitimate hide that the Bernie supporters were only voting against my posts because I was a Hillary supporter and not because of the content of my post. That they don't actually admit it like the post you shared above is irrelevant. It's clear that's what they're doing and you essentially admit that by stating that the jury system is the result of the "higher composition of Sanders supporters to Hillary supporters." If they were voting on the substance of the post, it wouldn't matter who they support so you basically just admitted that they're doing the same thing that the Hillary supporter you cited admitted to doing. At least the Hillary supporter admitted it, but at the end of the day, Hillary supporters do not have the power to game the flaws of the jury system.

The jury system is set up to handle abuse. That is not how Bernie supporters are using it. They are using it to silence Hillary supporters. As long as that is ok, I'm perfectly ok with the report bombing. In fact, I applaud it.

[Lancero]

48. You're calling the composition itself exploiting the system.

It isn't.

I'm going to be completely honest here though - Are some people putting in bogus choices? Probably. With the changes that staff recently did to the system, a lot of people have lost faith in the system - It doesn't matter anymore what they pick really, so a lot of jurors on both sides no longer care enough to properly enforce community standards.

I've been on a few juries where people have admitted to leaving a blatantly inappropriate post alone citing that very reason - That staff no longer care about enforcing the sites community standards, so why should they? - and because they;re wanting to try and force staff to actually do something about the issues rather then pushing them under the rug.

I wouldn't call the above exploiting the system though - I'd call that members crying for help, trying to get the site staff to get off their asses and actually do something about the infighting rather then just saying 'whatever, we'll do something about it in a few months'.

Hell, Skinner pretty much admitted to all my points himself.

[img][/img]

The problem isn't jury makeup. (Jury composition)

The problem is how polarized people are - A 'us vs them' mentality. (Infighting)

A lack of standards to follow and to uphold. (We DO have standards, but with the jury changes many don't care to uphold them. No more temp PPRs for people who disregard the standards equates to no standards enforcement, which leads to people on juries not bothering to vote in line with the standards)

We'll change things after primaries. (See above, people want staff to start doing changes now rather than putting it off a few months.)

The infighting wasn't as bad in the past as it is now, but when staff decided to remove the timeouts after five hides everything got a hundred times worse. Staff say the issue is standards enforcement, which not many care to do anymore because THEY removed the penalty for people who break community standards.

[nolawarlock]

49. So we're only disagreeing on the matter of degree?

I think most of them are putting in bogus choices. Only one of my five hides could even remotely be construed as fair, especially when considering that the far more incendiary things they were responding to weren't even addressed.

I've seen Bernie supporters say far worse and far more often here than Hillary supporters. That is probably because of the composition of the site, to be sure, but for them to be "crying for help" when they're responsible for most of the abuse is just rich. Yes, the jury system itself is largely to blame because there aren't admins actually backing up the system so it works effectively, but that doesn't make it ok to abuse it. Facebook, too, has a flaw, in that it allows participants to report bomb posts, groups, and individuals. So does that make it largely Facebook's fault?

So I guess I can say all those Facebook bombers were just crying for help.

I see no difference in the situations: supporters of a candidate gaming a flawed system. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Lancero]

50. Hillary groups weren't getting shutdown left and right on FB.

Defend the infighting all you wish, but as I said before - Congrats on becoming part of the problem.

[RobertEarl]

7. Where's Ruth?

Her campaign is Ruthless.

They must really hate Bernie. Meanwhile the good dems love Bernie!

[sheshe2]

29. The good Dems?????

Did you just draw a line in the sand?

[CoffeeCat]

53. Plenty of proof. I took screenshots of these yahoos back slapping each other

over shutting down the sites. Many others did as well.

If "OMG...never happened!" is your only defense...

[MisterP]

54. the Google is your friend--well, probably not YOURS in this case ...

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/4gfmdw/hillary_clinton_camp_now_paying_online_trolls_to/ http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/bernie-sanders-facebook-groups-removed-banned-deleted-why-hillary-clinton-attack-censorship-which/ http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511834870 http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511840015 http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511839019 http://www.inquisitr.com/3033052/clintons-internet-troll-campaign-against-bernie-sanders-is-a-new-low/ http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-facebook-groups-trolled/ http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/04/clintons-internet-supporters-allegedly-using-porno.html http://petercfrank.blogspot.com/2016/04/clinton-campaign-gets-facebook-to.html http://www.caucus99percent.com/content/how-low-will-clinton-trolls-go-they-hacked-bernie-facebook-accounts-post-child-porn http://theintellectualist.co/clinton-activists-get-number-of-pro-sanders-groups-removed-from-facebook-by-using-mass-reporting/ http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141428148 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511835607 http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/277657-hillary-supporters-take-down-bernie-fb-pages-in-coordinated http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511834474http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511836769 http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/david-brock-hillary-clinton-correct-the-record http://modernliberals.com/nah-facebook-isnt-shutting-bernie-groups-shitty-hillary-trolls/ http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280185434 https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/4gfmdw/hillary_clinton_camp_now_paying_online_trolls_to/ http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511840015 https://www.the-newshub.com/us-politics/are-hillary-clintons-paid-online-trolls-shutting-down-bernie-sanders-groups-on-social-media https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4fwwmf/hillary_clinton_spends_1_million_to_troll_sanders/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4ggmpi/bernie_groups_are_gone_from_facebook_urgent/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4gik2e/in_response_to_correct_the_records_reporting/ http://www.reddit.com/r/sandersforpresident/comments/4gjult/someone_needs_to_get_the_authorities_involved_since_hrc_supporters_used_child_abuse_images_to_take_down_bernie_pages_on_facebook/d2i69vq https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4gjult/someone_needs_to_get_the_authorities_involved/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/4ghvyv/hillary_clinton_trolls_shut_down_probernie/

[AzDar]

5. White-Noise Machines For EVERYONE!!

[Lancero]

10. With all the times she's done 180s on things it's hard to know what her real position is on anything

She'll be willing to compromise though. Usually a good thing, but with how rabid the RW is in their hatred of women, of racial minorities, and the LGBT community I'm getting the feeling that some of their compromises are going to suck.

Don't forget folks, DADT/DOMA are now labeled as compromises. We've managed to since get rid of them, but it took over a decade before the LGBT community could be returned the rights that were stripped from them as a 'compromise'.

Already she has said that she'd be willing to compromise on a womans right to bodily autonomy. So you might as well check one group off the list since she's laid out what rights of theirs that she intends to compromise on.

[felix_numinous]

12. Just say no

to a corporate super TTIP state. Now is the window of opportunity to take another path. They have shown what they are willing to do, and have revealed themselves here.

[jfern]

17. Similar to her husband, but with more wars

[Major Hogwash]

20. Net neutrality would merely remain a fond dream.

But, what about the NSA?

Well, its budget would be doubled.
Why?

Why not?
Hillary gets thing done.

[Firebrand Gary]

26. Bernie people, do not believe this.

It's a ridiculous accusation and it's only being done in an attempt to divide us further.

[MFM008]

30. So sure?

Its not the damn GOP. They're behind just about all asshattery.
Pose as a HRC supporter, you know like Charles Koch.
Its crap all designed to piss off fellow democrats??

[SheilaT]

36. She'll support the TPP. Support fracking.

Support cuts in Social Security and Medicare. Cut back the ACA. Keep the federal minimum wage at $7.25/hour.

Do you want more?

[Tarc]

41. Many Facebook Groups were unavailable for a time last night

Sanders people immediately reach for the

[JoePhilly]

42. Tin foil hat stock is soaring!!!!

[VulgarPoet]

43. We'd be at war with Iran by this time next year;

Net Neutrality would have gotten struck down, the disruptor article of the PATRIOT Act will be reinstated, all hail Queen Hillary as the earth fucking melts. eom.

[PyaarRevolution]

59. Yes I will be so excited!

When all those people die and it makes Vietnam look pleasant.

[FSogol]

45. ALCOA!

Great graphic! Next time the revolution should spend less time playing victim on the internet and more time registering their supporters to vote.

[Skwmom]

47. This country has still not recovered from the first go round with the disastrous duo.

[Duckhunter935]

52. Pretty much nothing

She is dispised by Congress

[silvershadow]

56. K&R .

[NorthCarolina]

57. No change, the poor will keep getting poorer, and the rich richer.

That's the natural order of things in the US.

[Throd]

58. Is this how "The Terminator" starts?

[matt819]

60. And the hillarybots still send this shit

They know the kind of person she is. She has a 25-year history of questionable ethics. She surrounds herself with surrogates who do her bidding, with her explicit or tacit support. And yet they play schoolyard games of prove it or I know you are but what am I.

Sure, non Hillary fans will vote for her. But they will do do with their eyes open. These blind faith sorts are as bad on the left as they are on the right.

[athena]

61. This has been debunked

as I'm sure you know already.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/26/an-elaborate-hillary-clinton-facebook-conspiracy-with-coordinated-attacks-and-porn-no-just-a-glitch.html

Supporters of Bernie Sanders took to Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter late Monday night after five of their Facebook community pages—with tens of thousands of members—went dark the night before five Democratic party primaries.

Theories on Sanders’s primary subreddit and Facebook pages quickly popped up, accusing Hillary Clinton supporters of a coordinated effort with a SuperPAC to report the Sanders pages for threats of violence and child pornography until the pages went down.

Some news organizations appeared to back some of the theories.

...

But Facebook—and now even the affected pro-Sanders groups themselves—say that the real problem was merely a database error that affected more pages than just Sanders-leaning community pages.