I received an e-mail alerting me that I had a post removed.

[SamKnause]

The last line of the e-mail is as follows; Otherwise, feel free to keep posting!

I tried to post under general discussion and was alerted I was not allowed.

How long does this timeout last ???

[Kali]

1. I think it is just an hour.

[SamKnause]

4. Thank you.

Could you ask the question on general discussion ???

I thought it was 12 hours.

I have not had a post removed for years, so I have forgotten.

Thank you in advance.

[Kali]

8. I found it.

If four of the six Jurors vote to hide the post:

The post will be hidden from public view (logged-in members may opt to view hidden posts).
The member who posted it will be blocked from making further replies in that discussion thread.
The member who posted it will be blocked from starting a new thread in that forum or group for one hour.
The member who posted it will have a link to the hidden post added to the Transparency page on their profile.
If the post is an OP (Original Post -- the post which begins a thread), the thread will be locked.

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

I'm not sure everything on that page is up to date (for example nobody can view the hidden post any more and they can't even see who posted it), but in general that is how things work.

[SamKnause]

13. Thank you so very much.

[Make7]

12. I looked up the message I received from I post of mine that was hidden a long, long time ago.

It specifically stated that I could not start a new discussion thread in the forum in which my post was hidden for one hour after the jury result.

[SamKnause]

14. I checked the e-mail and no time is mentioned.

Thanks for your input.

[Make7]

17. The jury system has undergone some changes since I have last had a post hidden.

But you might be in a perfect position to determine the amount of time the restriction lasts.

Try posting a new thread in that forum when it has been 55 minutes after the jury result came in, and if you can't then try again at an hour and a minute or so after the jury hide. If you still can't post a new thread, you'll have to decide if you want to continue trying to determine the time.

[katmondoo]

19. I avoid starting new discussions, they always seem to be in the wrong group

or I get snarky remarks or I get kicked off from posting on the subject. This goes on and on. Now I just answer to someone's post. Safer for me.

[samnsara]

21. same here...i seem to bunch up a lot of knickers..

..so I will bring up new topics on Twitter instead.

[Make7]

2. I think it lasts an hour. ( n/t )

[SamKnause]

5. Thank you.

[samnsara]

3. i wonder what the hour long time out is supposed to accomplish?

[Kali]

6. meltdowns

sometimes people want to carry on whatever got them in trouble

[SamKnause]

11. I wasn't carrying on.

I didn't know the post would get me in trouble.

[Kali]

16. it is pretty much all automatic and nothing personal in terms of how that part of it works

alerts can be more subjective but sometimes you make mistakes or the jury does, don't sweat it - or if you think it was completely off base you can appeal - just follow the instructions in the message you got.

I would even be careful asking too many questions about it, sometimes people will alert on those as well. If it crosses into whining or "interfering with forum moderation" as it listed. (I think I have had a hide based on that )

[LeftInTX]

25. I had something similar happen to me

I guess I didn't explain myself well and was accused of "Spreading right wing talking points".

The person who started the thread and who probably alerted accused me of something in the thread. However, I couldn't respond, cuz I was in time out. Oh well, if I can't make sense, it is probably best to drop the subject anyway.

I tried explaining to DU via my inbox, but they kept the post removed. So if management doesn't understand me, it wasn't worth trying explaining myself on a thread.

[rzemanfl]

27. If you made 9,000 some posts over six years and this is your first hide

you should be considered for sainthood.

[flibbitygiblets]

7. Right?

[SamKnause]

10. I don't know.

I wish they would have given me a warning, or ask me to remove it.

I don't think it broke the terms, but I don't want to argue.

[Tipperary]

23. You can always appeal it. I had a post removed, and when I appealed it, my appeal was granted.

Sometimes alerts are just ridiculous, and sometimes others just do not understand your post - then they misinterpret it. It is worth trying to appeal.

[Squinch]

26. It's to make you think about what you did, missy! (Or mister!)

[dameatball]

9. I had one removed back in March and never readthe e-mail until a few days ago. Oops!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. The general lack of feedback in the alert / jury / post-hiding system does not help DU

Transparency? Not much.

Feedback is what allows a system learn and improve. Adults, children, animals, societies, communities.

When alerting, there is no feedback on how the alert went. Some people even get put into limbo and their alerts are silently ignored.

If there was feedback on alerting, then we would have a better idea of what is acceptable to the community and to what degree. A 4-2 vote carries less weight than a 6-0 vote and the community would generate better alerts if outcomes were known.

Likewise, one never knows how close to the line one goes because there is no mail informing you that an alert occurred and how it played out. If I found that I had been alerted a couple of times at 3-3 or 2-4, then I would know to dial it back on that degree of contention. Likewise the couple of times I did have a post hidden I had no idea if what I wrote was considered bad, very bad, or a little naughty.

There is more secrecy in the system than is needed and it is counter-productive.

[FreepFryer]

20. +1. And the lack of an opportunity to rebut or clarify ones intent is likewise problematic. nt

[Tipperary]

24. You can appeal if you disagree with having a post removed.

[question everything]

28. And for jurors to expalin their votes

I always provided a comment. Rarely voted to remove a post, offering the complainer to rebut. That this is a discussion group. Wish I could do it now with so many itching fingers.

[wroberts189]

30. I could have easily changed "half stupid" with "I disagree"

I was not given the option to change a word or two... Instead my whole post on the merits of free college was deleted. I have been on DU over 10 years... paid member when I could afford it. Really dissapointed in DU moderater but maybe on appeal it will be restored.

[kimbutgar]

22. I got alerted on yesterday and had a post removed

Because instead of being nice I made a bad comment about condelezza rice. I wrote it and was going to delete because I knew it was bad. But o let it rip.

That said, I had no problem it was removed.