Announcements
Related: About this forumThe 2020 Democratic presidential candidate supporter groups are live!
This discussion thread was locked by Skinner (a host of the Announcements group).
As promised in my earlier post, today we are launching new groups for supporters of the various 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.
We believe that supporters of the various Democratic presidential candidates appreciate having safe spaces where they can interact with their fellow supporters and post positive messages about their their preferred candidates. Our hope and intent is that these groups be used to positively support members' favored democratic candidates rather than to attack other candidates.
With this in mind, we have created special functionality for the 2020 candidate the groups:
+ All 2020 candidate groups can be found under the Democrats 2020 category on the left-hand side of any page.
+ All candidate groups have a small banner at the top of the group and at the top of all threads in that group containing text indicating that you are viewing a candidate group.
+ Only members who have selected a candidate as their favorite are able to post in the group for that preferred candidate.
+ If you change your favored candidate, you need to wait seven days before you are eligible to post in that candidate's group. (This is to discourage supporters of other candidates from temporarily changing their candidate preference in order to post disruptive messages in groups for candidates they do not support.)
+ If you select a particular candidate as your favorite, you will see threads from that candidate's supporter group on your Latest Page and Greatest Page. People who have not selected that candidate will not see those posts on their Latest and Greatest Pages.
+ All DU members can browse all Democratic candidate groups. All DU members may read, recommend, or alert on posts in any candidate groups.
+ Posts in the candidate groups are covered by the DU rules, like posts everywhere else on our discussion forums.
+ The first thing you should do when you go to your new candidate group is select a member to serve as the lead host of that group. That person will have all the normal functionality of a group host, including naming additional hosts, locking discussion threads, and blocking disruptive people out of the group. When you have selected a person let an admin know so we may designate that person as lead host.
So far the admins feel pretty good about how the Democratic Primaries are going here on DU. Let's all strive to keep it relatively positive. And remember the most important thing is staying unified so we can defeat Trump next year!
Skinner, EarlG, Elad
DU Admins
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Hekate
(94,626 posts)Cha
(305,397 posts)SWBTATTReg
(24,085 posts)Maven
(10,533 posts)It seems like a good idea to give everyone a safe space, but in the end, it encourages factionalism and heightens the tension between the most zealous supporters of each candidate. It isn't a net positive, especially when there are many outside forces trying to deepen divisions within the party. We should talk to each other more, not retreat to our respective silos.
watoos
(7,142 posts)I said something positive about Tulsi Gabbard and I was unceremoniously attacked by a lot of people.
I feel that I cannot speak favorably of Tulsi in the open forum without being attacked.
The thing is that I haven't chosen my candidate yet, I am sorting them out and picking out the ones who are tough as nails, because that's what it is going to take to beat Trump.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)mobeau69
(11,587 posts)Just renaming a street MLK was a political minefield in South Bend. Pete came up with the solution and now the major East/West corridor downtown (formerly St. Joseph Street) is now Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)safeinOhio
(34,069 posts)I have blocked all candidate post. I will vote for who ever wins, but in the mean time I have found this to be my best choice. I end up reading those that make it to Greatest Threads. They seem to always remind me of why I have blocked those.
Best of luck to everyone and who they support and if you kids don't behave, I'll turn this car around and go home.
Lazy Daisy
(928 posts)joshcryer
(62,490 posts)...and block them at whim? Will the administration note divisive, particularly post-primary divisive behavior, and eradicate it?
DownriverDem
(6,640 posts)Block at will? It sure doesn't sound like the DU site I've come to for years.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)And under the new system it is impossible to accidentally post in a candidate supporter group for a candidate you do not support. So you are only in danger of being blocked out of the group for the one candidate you support.
In your case, you have Beto O'Rourke selected as your favored candidate. This means that you will only be able to post in the Beto O'Rourke group. I highly doubt that as a supporter of Beto, you will get into trouble with the host of the group and get yourself blocked.
yaesu
(8,229 posts)rocktivity
(44,883 posts)rocktivity
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)efhmc
(15,007 posts)candidates as long as they are done in a positive manner? I am fairly sure I will not pick a candidate until I go to my state primary. There are too many things that can happen between now and then.
EarlG
(22,540 posts)stonecutter357
(12,769 posts)WheelWalker
(9,199 posts)FailureToCommunicate
(14,324 posts)Thanks Skinner, et al.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,374 posts)So if there is a very effective writer, who posts regularly in one of the candidates groups, and who also is critical of one or more of the other candidates but does it within the accepted standards WITHIN THE GROUP, even if a little salty, your rule allows a vindictive supporter from another group to target perhaps a popular contributor within that group and shut them down. Or at least make their lives miserable.
Shouldn't the moderator and members of a particular group have some weight in determining who is shut out of their group instead of those decisions resting with the majority who are not supporters?
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Don't use your candidate groups to criticize other candidates.
Socal31
(2,490 posts)Even before seeing the author. Due to the nature of primaries, there has to be a certain level of constructive negativity tolerated in GD. But when that environment becomes too toxic, one can retreat to their candidate's sub-forum; a safe-space of positivity.
Calling it a safe-space alone should keep out a large percentage of would-be concern-trollers.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,374 posts)It's going to be a fine line to draw between comparing platforms when you are afraid to say anything faulty about a competitors platform even in comparison if it puts that competitor in a bad light.
I was under the impression that these new forums would help eliminate the rankor in other forums if folks were now allowed to "get it all out" commiserating with like minded folks when it came to expressing reasons for disagreement with other candidates. But I Guess these new forums are all about the positives. Sounds like a great idea. I will expect this rule of "if you can't say anything nice..." will be applied in regard to every competing candidate in every group.
samnsara
(18,282 posts)defacto7
(13,610 posts)It may just work, but I have some reservation about how it will help healthy conversation. Some open competition and false information busting is good. I think the single forum was working fairly well and I'd hate to see divisive behaviour increase. But at this point I'm not sure of the outcome. I'll hope for the best and play the game board provided.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)We are hoping to avoid a repeat of 2016.
defacto7
(13,610 posts)marble falls
(62,047 posts)making DU the most civil site on the net.
Heartstrings
(7,349 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)Firestorm49
(4,195 posts)Ive not been aware as to how well organized the site is. Partly because I havent taken the necessary time to explore all of the features, and partly due to the fact that I cant let these things run my life. So, congratulations to all of you who go above and beyond to make this an informative and well managed site.
Politicub
(12,287 posts)OhNo-Really
(3,991 posts)" blocking disruptive people from the group " sounds great.
Callmecrazy
(3,066 posts)If I have a question about my candidate that may not follow the herd, will I get shut down?
I'm going to have tough questions about our candidates. This is a serious job and I'll be asking some frank questions. If the questions ruffle some feathers I suggest you simply don't answer instead of trying to silence someone who is looking for information.
If the hosts start getting bossy and decide which way the direction a forum or thread should be going, it defeats the whole purpose of a DISCUSSION BOARD.
applegrove
(123,112 posts)littlemissmartypants
(25,483 posts)mopinko
(71,800 posts)w such an embarrassment of riches, i would like to be able to pick more than one candidate to support if it means that i am restricted by my choice.
SergeStorms
(19,312 posts)It's greatly appreciated. Many thanks to all involved.
Amyishere
(69 posts)At this point in time, after being so disgusted that not one person in any conversation about "inappropriate" touching and Biden has yet to bring up Al Franken, I have gotten fed up. People are talking about how it is necessary to have a rational and reasonable discussion and respect the feelings of those involved and learning and etc etc etc...
Yet not one mention of how Al Franken was set up by Roger Stone, then hung out to dry by those who should have stood by him. Al Franken's actions weren't "creepy", either, they were a total set up. The man was a comedian, and also his actions were far less invasive than Biden's, but not one mention in comparison, making me wonder how programmed and set up the daily talking points and what subject has to be avoided at all costs, because Lord knows it's a pretty obvious comparison to make to me.
So for the time being because he is the man I think would be the one I would most like to see as president, even though he's not running..yet..I am supporting Al Franken.
Practically the only thing that would change my mind about just putting him in as a write in candidate would be if Stacey Abrams decides to run.
I quit Warren after I saw her comment last week that it is time to "move on" or something along those lines from the Mueller Report, and how it needs to be released..that people have other issues they are more concerned with. I can't think of a single issue at all that is more important right now than exposing and getting that scumbucket orange criminal out of the White House.
democrank
(11,250 posts)Flush Trump!
Response to Skinner (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MH1
(18,148 posts)I heard these were made read-only. Still I would like to find them. Specifically John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Martin O'Malley.
I am sorry you felt those groups needed to be closed.
I appreciate your efforts at creating a great community with the challenges brought by presidential primary season. That said, I am neutral about the new group policy. I don't have a favorite among the announced or expected candidates, and I do like to read the back and forth in the Primaries forum; because even though I will definitely vote for one of these people in the general, I want to know what I am getting - warts and all. (and so far they all have warts, IMO, but none are remotely close to as evil as the present occupant of the WH). I hope the effect of the new groups isn't to make it harder for me to gather that info, but it isn't all about me, of course.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Except the Barack Obama group and the Hillary Clinton group, which have moved to the Politics & Government category:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1089
Response to Skinner (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed