General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (milestogo) on Tue Dec 31, 2024, 03:17 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

Shrek
(4,249 posts)That's another frequent one.
JustAnotherGen
(34,629 posts)(named anchor or pundit) right now!
dflprincess
(28,741 posts)I take that as (usually Rachel or Lawrence, it seems) is saying something you may really want to hear.
I don't take it as an order.
JustAnotherGen
(34,629 posts)Is beyond ridiculous.
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)
MarineCombatEngineer
(15,018 posts)
womanofthehills
(9,605 posts)Can't make it up. I also hate it when they vote your post out when its from a left wing source but they disagree and vote it out as a right wing source.
BannonsLiver
(19,027 posts)Never has been. It was founded by a Republican and is now owned by a conservative German.
womanofthehills
(9,605 posts)Hardvard. edu Feb 2024 -Allsides has Politico leaning left.
ttps://guides.library.harvard.edu/newsleans/allsides
"AllSides uses a patented bias rating system to classify news sources as left, center, or right leaning. Components of the rating system include crowd-sourcing, surveys, internal research, and use of third party sources such as Wikipedia and research conducted by Groseclose and Milyo at UCLA. Note that while the Groseclose & Milyo results are popular, the methodology it is not without critique."
ttps://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462444
MediBias a fact check
"Overall, we rate Politico Left-Center biased[/i] based on story selection and editorial positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. "
"Both sides of the political spectrum have accused Politico of having a left or right bias. For example, Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog group in Washington, has accused them of having a “Republican tilt.” Politico also published an article criticizing Obama for not being a strong supporter of Israel: “Obama’s Jewish Problem.” In another article, they state that Liberals are not as tolerant as they say they are: “Why Liberals Aren’t as Tolerant as They Think.” Further, an article criticizing Democratic Socialism: “Down Goes Socialism,” and another criticizing Bernie Sanders, “Bernie’s army in disarray.” Lastly, according to the Poynter Institute, Politico is balanced.
The right-leaning Daily Caller had also criticized Politico for having a liberal bias when they compared a New York Times headline to Politico’s Playbook headline by claiming that it “Extended further to the left than the NYT on this headline.”
A 2014 Pew Research Survey found that 59% of Politico’s audience is consistently or primarily liberal, 16% Mixed, and 26% consistently or mostly conservative. This indicates that a more liberal audience prefers politico.
In review, Politico occasionally publishes listicles such as “All of Trump’s Russia Ties, in 7 Charts.” They also publish articles with minimally loaded words such as “Ocasio-Cortez warns Trump Jr. about subpoena power in response to the meme” and the source to credible media outlets such as Reuters and the NY Times. However, they sometimes use emotional headlines: Establishment looks to crush liberals on Medicare for All. They also have a content partnership with the South China Morning Post, which we rate Mixed for factual reporting.
Editorially, they provide a balance of opinions in the past, as evidenced by the criticism they have received from both sides. However, since our last review, many more op-eds and news stories favor the left through story selection and wording, such as this Republicans gripped by dread as multiple crises swirl, and this Trump official pressured CDC to change report on Covid and kids. They generally report news factually and recently with a more left-leaning bias in both story selection and editorial position
Last Updated on December 6, 2024 by Media Bias Fact Check
summer_in_TX
(3,519 posts)Axel Springer currently owns Die Welt, the German publication which published Elon Musk's op-ed in which he told Germans that the far right AfD party was Germany's "last spark of hope." There's been an uproar about Musk's attempt to interfere in the upcoming German elections, and the opinion editor of the newspaper promptly resigned over management's decision to publish it.
Politico's political coverage used to be considered pretty centrist/center-left and reliable. Not sure that there's been enough change for the ratings to change, but since those are done by analyzing coverage over a lengthy period of time rather than one single article, I'm not sure that there hasn't been some change either that just hasn't been published because the research isn't complete for that time period.
Those ratings take time.
BannonsLiver
(19,027 posts)spooky3
(37,265 posts)The TOS clearly states RW sources shouldn’t be posted here unless you’re making fun of the content, etc.
It’s not always clear which sources are RW but sometimes it’s obvious (e.g., Fox News).
Demovictory9
(35,045 posts)LeftInTX
(32,761 posts)Or they pop up via SM.
I try to find another source.
But let's face it: Sharing a Daily Mail article in the lounge or Weird News, or if it's celebrity news, non-political stuff does not make someone a right winger.
One time I posted an article from the NY Times. However, it had a link to a tweet from a RW source. (The tweet was a video) I got chewed out. I replied that NY Times probably vetted their source. Other sources that weren't RW also had the video.
wryter2000
(47,793 posts)Ignore what you don't like.
maxsolomon
(36,182 posts)
Response to maxsolomon (Reply #19)
wryter2000 This message was self-deleted by its author.
maxsolomon
(36,182 posts)I thought your comment was amusing, as it's quite a common reaction on DU.
Hence the
wryter2000
(47,793 posts)I’ll delete the post. I’m sorry. No sarcasm.
Skittles
(163,073 posts)IMAGINE THAT
Dave Bowman
(4,886 posts)I've noticed this one often recently.
Dulcinea
(8,118 posts)That's what I do. I come here a lot to share news stories that people may have missed, & sometimes I get flack for it, but I don't let it bother me. They can read them & like them or not. I can't control that.
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)PCIntern
(27,215 posts)STOP WATCHING TEEVEE NEWS!!!!
or
CANCEL YOUR CABLE!!! I HAVE NOT WATCHED TV SINCE IKE WAS PRESIDENT!!!
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)Hekate
(96,988 posts)Plus Rachel Maddow is being paid too much by MSNBC!!!!
milestogo
(20,118 posts)They cover Congress pretty thoroughly. Yes, they definitely have a right wing bias. But if nobody else is reporting on it, do we just ignore? But some people will complain about using The Hill as a source.
Sympthsical
(10,439 posts)I'm not sure what people read since so many things are disqualified.
That's why I get all my news from my cousin Rachel's blog. None of that right-wing Rachel Maddow for me, no sir! (She said she likes oranges one time, and we all know oranges are a famously MAGA fruit, because Florida)
Snarkoleptic
(6,108 posts)while trying to gut our earned benefits and drive us toward fascism/Putinism.
I'm happy to ignore them and won't tell anyone what to post, but FUCK MUSK and his shit-bird site.
Dennis Donovan
(29,950 posts)...and the post renders on DU. Clicking the video link inside a tweet doesn't redirect you to X, so you're robbing Elmo of actual "clicks" or "engagements" that he can then use to lure advertisers.
Snarkoleptic
(6,108 posts)n/t
Dennis Donovan
(29,950 posts)He makes money on ads, not clicks. Clicks on X count as engagements on X, which is the only place he displays ads. Displaying an X post embedded on a completely different site doesn't display ads. And clicking on a video in an embedded ad doesn't bring you back to X to view it, so, you're never seeing an ad.
If you click on the post itself, then you're redirected to X and that's when he makes money. Embedding a post into another site's page doesn't mean shit to advertisers since their ads won't be seen. Clicking the video only plays the video - again, no ad involved...
JoseBalow
(7,117 posts)They also monetize promoted content, accounts, hashtags, also data licensing, and more. If you're interested to learn about how Twitter actually earns it's money, it's easy to research.
The traffic that you provide them via embedding Tweets absolutely helps the site, ad impressions notwithstanding.
Dennis Donovan
(29,950 posts)On edit: that was written in September - I've since changed my stance to only posting tweets when there's a video available in it that isn't available anywhere else.
JoseBalow
(7,117 posts)Every time it is rendered and displayed on a page, it absolutely does benefit Elmo. If the post is viewed 500 times, that's 500 views for Elmo.
This is what embedded Tweets look like for me using the Privacy Badger browser extension...
That does not benefit Elmo at all. If I allow it to be displayed, then it would.
Dennis Donovan
(29,950 posts)stopdiggin
(13,542 posts)(which, due to the temperature of the populous and country - has ramped up a number of degrees)
- and not quite the 'directive' that you take it to be. Or at least needn't (or doesn't deserve?) be taken so! Shake it off. Be a little more secure in your own opinions (and moral stance).
Keep in mind that everyone waving a shaker or pom-pom - is not really a crossing guard. It's OK to walk past ....
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bluetus
(866 posts)There are certainly flagger bullies here and on most other similar sites. They make all sorts of accusations about a person's motives for whatever position they present in a posting. If you are asked to judge, take some time to get past whether you agree or disagree with the position. Instead, look at the facts. Did the post actually violate any rules?
It is not a violation to state an unpopular or challenging position. It is not a violation to observe things that Democrats have been doing poorly, resulting in failures. It is a violation to directly attract a specific person.
We are at a moment when a reckoning is badly needed, IMHO. We have been steadily losing power for 50 years. There are "glass half full" personalities who can cite individual victories, and we all want to celebrate those. But we must recognize that 2 generations ago, roughly half the public proudly identified as Democrats, and now only 25% do. We must realize that we have completely lost the Supreme Court, and can no longer count on the Judicial branch as the ultimate firewall. That is gone, and Trump is going to take every advantage of that.
So jurors, please be patient with people who make posts that sound urgent, agitated, even hair on fire. And if you are one who naturally rejects any suggestions of change, at least consider that you may be part of the circumstances we face today.
Bottom line, a circular firing squad does no good. Nor does creating a bubble of reality denial. We must move forward together, even if that means ruffling some feathers along the way.
stopdiggin
(13,542 posts)ms liberty
(10,111 posts)Bluetus
(866 posts)Maybe I should flag that.
I have read the site for over a decade. I decided I should speak up because there has been so much denial, and so little time for us to act in ways that will be effective.
If you are a person who only wants to have your own opinion reinforced, maybe this isn't the best place to be. Or maybe it is. Maybe that is what the site leadership sees as the mission of the site. If so, then most threads here would be pointless.
canetoad
(18,826 posts)Appreciated your thoughtful post of more than one terse sentence. Welcome to DU; please keep sharing your thoughts.
Deuxcents
(21,587 posts)Walleye
(39,229 posts)Maybe offer some constructive suggestions?
Bluetus
(866 posts)It is asking for exactly the opposite -- no opposing or challenging opinions. I have made what I hope are constructive, action-oriented, results-oriented suggestions on other threads. I welcome you to look them up, and I will be happy to exchange views on those threads.
JoseBalow
(7,117 posts)Don't post messages about site rules, enforcement, juries, hosts, administration, alerts, alerters, removed posts, appeals, locked threads, or anything else related to how this website is moderated (except in the Ask the Administrators forum).
Welcome to DU

Bluetus
(866 posts)Last edited Mon Dec 30, 2024, 11:44 PM - Edit history (1)
I made no comments about the site moderators, their system or any of their decisions. I commented abut USER behavior, which is exactly what the OP was about.
If I were the flagging type (and I'm not -- I have never flagged any post on any site) it seems like this entire thread would be a good one to remove. It seems to be some folks expressing personal grievances apropos to nothing.
womanofthehills
(9,605 posts)Good people keep disappearing and DU gets smaller. We never know if someone is taking a break from DU or they just got kicked off by the flagger bullies.
I hate it when someone says to someone new - how dare you post that -you just joined and only have 5 posts. How are we supposed to get new people to join if this stuff keeps happening.
SunImp
(2,464 posts)Some of these same people constantly spam threads with twitter post, +1 inflammatory comments (they're glad they don't have to do that now), cheerleading Duers who are obviously bullying another. These people think everything is fine & DON'T want things to change for the better.
Celerity
(48,988 posts)Good post.
LeftInTX
(32,761 posts)Instead we get things like, "Let's take to the streets".....
My response: "Can someone please organize this?"
Followed by a response to me: "Quit making excuses"
Posting an actual event or how to is great, (a march, a phone call ) but vague directives such as "get out the pitchforks", I interpret as directives "yell at your computer or TV more louder than you currently yell"
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)Because this is a political forum. There is no need to mention any political figures.
BannonsLiver
(19,027 posts)That’s been the case for years now.
Callie1979
(641 posts)dalton99a
(87,743 posts)Callie1979
(641 posts)Factual info may get alerted & hidden because enough random jurors dont LIKE the fact that was posted. Which is odd; I wouldnt think a place like this would actually BLOCK factual info just because it may not be popular.
1000% totally agree. One thing I absolutely hate is an Echo Chamber. But dissenting voices and opinion rapidly get squashed as "right wing" talking points. Absurd.
ProfessorGAC
(72,149 posts)When a juror, I have a problem with deleting a post that delivers contrary views but based in fact.
So, I completely understand your point.
underpants
(189,686 posts)I figured it was a majority. I have no idea how many jurors are on jury.
I rarely vote to cancel a post I’m alerted to.
ProfessorGAC
(72,149 posts)I'm not sure the number, but I believe the jury has to be a clear majority but not unanimous. Pretty sure about that, but not positive.
I usually vote to return if the alerted post is just a different, or unpopular, POV.
I think I have a more rigid definition of "personal attack" than others, too
But, clear violations of TOS? I feel obligated to go with at least "Close Call..."
True Dough
(22,511 posts)are like-minded jurors, Prof!
ProfessorGAC
(72,149 posts)We are like-minded about quite a few things!
Attilatheblond
(5,563 posts)... I wonder 'just how insecure or fussy was the person who alerted on this?
Tender feelings are good, up to a point, but I see a lot of stuff that gets alerted and sent to peer review that should just be ignored if it bothered the alert-er so much. If people can't tolerate differing opinions, well, they should go to TikTok after it gets shut down. Jeeze, people, what gives with the 'my way or the highway' thinking?
wryter2000
(47,793 posts)My alerted post was re-instated. I had posted something that was unflattering to a group, but it was merely a statement of fact.
Autumn
(47,624 posts)It's just your opinion about Garland and I need proof !! is another good one.
You went off topic from the OPs post!
Irish_Dem
(67,214 posts)I don't need word or thought police on my tail every day.
BannonsLiver
(19,027 posts)Sure he's dismantling our democracy, and is an unelected co-president, but let's think long and hard about what we call him so we don't offend anyone.
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)because here's what the Constitution says about treason blah blah
And he might not be a liar because he thinks it's true blah blah
And don't you call him fat because you're insulting Americans blah blah
...
BannonsLiver
(19,027 posts)Stuff like that is one of the reasons why we lose.
bottomofthehill
(9,082 posts)I am with you, the purity police suck. Robert Kennedy is a junkie, a fucking heroin addict, Trump was a fat fuck before finding Ozympic, LindsyG is everything people say he is, fuck them and their feelings all. Snowflake alert, plenty of people suck, are should be called out for it
Irish_Dem
(67,214 posts)But we have to be polite about him like we are at Buckingham Palace meeting the King.
madinmaryland
(65,343 posts)
anciano
(1,739 posts)of people who are chomping at the bit to tell me what I "should" be doing. It makes me wonder how I got through the past 77 years without them?....🤔
Sympthsical
(10,439 posts)(I kid. Over time, chomping has become common usage as well. But the opportunity was irresistable)
anciano
(1,739 posts)Well done. I left myself open for that one!
Maeve
(43,179 posts)Unless someone is pushing RW ideas, or spamming, more things are allowed than not. Yeah, I don't particularly want to hear some of the finger-wagging stuff, either, but most of it comes from a decent place. So I ignore it and go on, hiding it if it really ticks me off, but...DU Admin allows so much that I DO like and can't find easily elsewhere. All part of civic discourse
MineralMan
(148,780 posts)often, I'm afraid. Nobody here can tell you to do or not do anything with any authority. I advise just ignoring such posts.
grain of ...
GoneOffShore
(17,767 posts)I'm now going to make some more popcorn.
emulatorloo
(45,730 posts)and other Democrats you’re going to get pushback.
Just a fact of life.
electric_blue68
(20,603 posts)I don't watch, or look at RW sites in general, so I get news of that stuff here, actually.
I think it's important to know some of what they're saying to properly combat it.
mcar
(44,351 posts)Lemons UK
(225 posts)
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)Strelnikov_
(7,954 posts)all in a ‘General Discussion’ forum,
A nasty case of the scolds has taken hold of this site.
bottomofthehill
(9,082 posts)I commented to something that was incorrect and there was no link. I called it wrong and got the ugly “Link?”
Common sense needs no link.
dalton99a
(87,743 posts)bottomofthehill
(9,082 posts)TBF
(35,069 posts)I guess the best advice would be to ignore those threads, and post in others instead (or start your own OPs).
Also, a couple of things to consider - it sounds like EarlG is going to put up a forum where folks can make suggestions about the Democratic party itself - which is bound to be interesting. So, I'd stick around for that. And MIRT should be reopening again in Jan/Feb and a bunch of us have served on that 2-3 terms and will be taking a break. In that forum you keep an eye on all the new members (under 100 posts only), and it can be fast paced at times. You might enjoy getting a look at how that whole process works. You're a star member so would likely be a good candidate - EarlG should put up a notice looking for new volunteers pretty soon.
Have a good day! (not an order, just being decent!)
ProfessorGAC
(72,149 posts)I second everything in that post.
Elessar Zappa
(16,318 posts)I apologize if I’ve ever been guilty of doing so.
ItsjustMe
(11,971 posts)There's not really much you can do about it.
Just try to ignore them, or put them on ignore.
stopdiggin
(13,542 posts)social parameter. (that being the scolds and finger waggers inhabiting our side of the aisle)
snowybirdie
(5,979 posts)those telling me what tv to watch. Good post
Keepthesoulalive
(1,134 posts)Many videos and headlines are clickbait. How should people push back in a non confrontational way?
Polybius
(19,625 posts)Last week two posters (not you) posted a false news story that was fooling some fellow DU'ers in the thread.
Buzz cook
(2,696 posts)The person has the power to enforce it. If they don't then you have the power to tell them to fuck off.
You probably know that.
So you're just kvetching. If it makes you feel better, fine.
Doesn't do anything for me though.
Fiendish Thingy
(19,023 posts)There have been occasions where someone posts an OP with egregious, provably false information.
I’m talking about falsely reporting someone’s death, arrest, or win/loss of an election, that type of thing.
In addition there are posts expressing opinions that use provably false information to support those opinions.
How do you feel about the DU community calling for the OP to delete their post in those cases?
(I’m not suggesting you have posted misinformation)
There is no rule in the TOS against posting false or misinformation, outside of “kooky extremist content”, so if it doesn’t fall into that category, then what is the community to do about it?
nocoincidences
(2,383 posts)My morals are so much higher than your morals.
History will judge that I am right and you are wrong.
Doncha just love people like that? Doncha immediately want to change your thinking so that you can be like them?
krawhitham
(4,967 posts)milestogo
(20,118 posts)Very nice.
krawhitham
(4,967 posts)Now that's true thinly veiled passive aggressive hostility.
elleng
(139,034 posts)Shellback Squid
(9,294 posts)hunter
(39,438 posts)... and frequently ignore people who are telling me what to do, even those in actual positions of authority. This has gotten me into serious trouble more times than I care to confess. Nobody on any social media site can order me around.
I don't watch television news or opinion. That works for me.
I don't watch any advertising supported television at all. That works for me.
I have a flip phone. That works for me.
DU is my only social media site. That works for me.
Meat is not part of my regular daily diet. That works for me.
Etc.
You be yourself, I'll be myself.
Kaleva
(39,106 posts)"I do not use Facebook or Instagram"
"Yeah I saw that being discussed on Facebook by some young mothers"
You don't use it but you read it?
Looking at your history, I found two threads where what you describe may have happened. In one of the threads, the statement wasn't directed at you but was to all of DU.
milestogo
(20,118 posts)I got off Facebook 4 years ago.
Kaleva
(39,106 posts)milestogo
(20,118 posts)Kaleva
(39,106 posts)milestogo
(20,118 posts)milestogo
(20,118 posts)How long to leave cabbage in a bra?
Hold leaves in place with your bra. If the ridges of the cabbage leaves are hard, gently roll a soup can over the ridges to soften before use. Wear the leaves continuously for two hours then discard. Repeat each day until your breasts are comfortable with not being nursed—usually three to five days.
That's not the kind of info you forget...
I really like the internet. There's so much info to be had about so many different subjects.
gay texan
(2,959 posts)Eat your veggies
Mow the lawn
Paint the fence
True Dough
(22,511 posts)you also have to wax the car.
-Mr Miyagi
gay texan
(2,959 posts)" Where did all of these cars come from?"
"Detroit!"
DBoon
(23,623 posts)apparently he or she thought CNN was a right wing source and they had to keep messaging me about it
i blocked the sender. i find blocking very useful.
Kaleva
(39,106 posts)She's now FFR'd
Celerity
(48,988 posts)It is very disheartening to see OPs that were clearly bullshit, were thoroughly debunked up and down the thread, yet the OP refuses to pull it.
Then, to compound matters, new posters come in, and completely ignoring all the numerous replies that showed the OP to false, continue to amp up the dross.
I have see this happen far too often. It really is a bad look for DU.
In regards to RW sources, I do not come here to read bollocks from The Gateway Pundit, The Federalist, The Daily Caller, etc etc. I fully retain the right to call shit RW sources like those out. As with the first part of my reply, if people do not like my actions in that area, they can place me on ignore.
stopdiggin
(13,542 posts)really have no place. And shouldn't enjoy any kind of, "just ignore it" community protections. If it's flat out wrong - it is destructive! Sum total!
Think. Again.
(22,330 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(3,962 posts)Asking for a friend 😉
Bluetus
(866 posts)Patton French
(1,534 posts)
Ocelot II
(123,950 posts)But people on the internet who have opinions about what I should or shouldn't do can't make me do or not do anything, so I don't worry about any of it.
usonian
(16,854 posts)Last edited Mon Dec 30, 2024, 11:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Getting off the jelly doughnuts.
And hamberders.
Skittles
(163,073 posts)
milestogo
(20,118 posts)
usonian
(16,854 posts)I changed it.
Hope you are happy now.
Now, complain about leopard lips.
madinmaryland
(65,343 posts)milestogo
(20,118 posts)TBF
(35,069 posts)Old school reply ...
JustAnotherGen
(34,629 posts)Fugging now
LAS14
(15,117 posts)Scrivener7
(54,997 posts)as a complaint against people who tell people not to post stuff.
I'm guessing some are not seeing the irony.
And that's just the beginning of the weirdness in this one.
I'm kind of enjoying reading it.
Attilatheblond
(5,563 posts)
Kid Berwyn
(19,730 posts)Asking for the fiends.
hlthe2b
(108,924 posts)to help them through any "jitters" or nerves facing some of their former mentors. Successful as the approach is, they would advocate that we put propranolol (common beta-blocker) in the drinking water for the general public--only half kidding-- (to calm the f..k down!-- LOL )
Maybe that wasn't such a bad idea, after all? Can we infuse it through the keyboards?
JoseBalow
(7,117 posts)
* No actual facts were harmed in the expression of this opinion.
walkingman
(9,016 posts)Don’t get defensive or blame others. Sometimes It’s not what someone says, it’s what you hear. And remember, you can always reject criticism that does not match what your core beliefs tell you is correct.
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,007 posts)Voltaire2
(15,366 posts)Nobody is ordering you around. Even if the alleged utterances were phrased as you suggest, nobody posting them has any control at all over your behavior.
Now go delete your op.
NeoTrajan
(13 posts)The world is bigger than this ...
Nuff said ...
LudwigPastorius
(12,041 posts)milestogo
(20,118 posts)I had a professor once who criticized the whole class for the papers we turned in.
"I want you to give me an argument!" he said, slamming his fist on the desk. None of this "description" stuff. If you turn a paper in to me it better have an argument!
Abolishinist
(2,357 posts)PeaceWave
(1,421 posts)ms liberty
(10,111 posts)
eppur_se_muova
(38,686 posts)I've used that (or other performance of that skit) a few times lately.
Meowmee
(8,215 posts)Someone ordered me to “ watch the damn video” because I might learn something… about a Bernie video posted that I asked why not just post a synopsis for it. So they did and I said it was nothing I didn’t already know. 😹 The person ordering me to do so was not the op either.
I think some of these people are trolls.
milestogo
(20,118 posts)that's over 20 minutes long and apparently makes a really good point.
So why can't you just tell me the point and not make me watch the 20 min video?
Meowmee
(8,215 posts)This one was eight minutes long apparently but I think the op should give us a synopsis about the video anyway. Whatever the length is. I feel like I’m wasting my time to click on a post and all that’s there is a video. A lot of them are simply click bait too.
So they were kind enough to do that when I asked. But when I said, I already knew all of that, that was when someone else decided to come and start swearing at me and ordering me around, etc….telling me to “just watch the damn video” is not going to get me to watch your video. Most of the videos posted here I don’t watch anyway.
If I thought there was something there that was different I might’ve watched it- who knows.
Even more annoying is when a video gives you an idea of what it’s about in the title and then whoever is doing it goes on and on and on about something that has nothing to do with their title, etc.
It’s also very annoying to keep seeing the same thing posted over and over again by different people. I don’t find it quite as annoying now because I have so many people on ignore here that I don’t see a lot of what’s posted here anymore anyway.
Laffy Kat
(16,585 posts)I've never really felt "ordered around." If I don't like a suggestion I just ignore it.
dgauss
(1,291 posts)I tend to agree with your comment, but it does get a bit confusing.
True Dough
(22,511 posts)
JustAnotherGen
(34,629 posts)Is pure comedic gold.
Xolodno
(6,918 posts)Because they sometimes have a very valid point. Don't expect me to goose step. Every so often I have one too many and post something and boom, I either get a lot of angry posts or a jury hides it. I think part of the problem is, we have many who believe some of our leaders are Democratic Jesus and nothing should be questioned. Well, its a big country with a lot of diverse opinion. Purity tests will never win elections, but we have to listen to opposing views as we may not understand where the other person is coming from, even if their wrong.
I won't even get on my soap box here and state why we lost, I would be burned at the stake. Intrestingly, a number of my GOP friends did not gloat, they actually asked me why I thought Biden lost. When I told them, they nodded in agreement. Let me tell you, they weren't exactly happy Trump won either and just held their nose. I could say more, but a jury will probably hide it.
LeftInTX
(32,761 posts)Xolodno
(6,918 posts)...where Biden still thought he could have won. But since you mentioned it, how was the campaign Harris ran on any different? Pelosi shot down AOC for a powerful committee chair. I'm a firm believer that we need new ideas, but the excuse is always "too liberal, people won't go for it". Well, we still lost and if we are going to lose, lets at least see where the chips fall, we might learn something instead of playing it safe all the time.
LeftInTX
(32,761 posts)I was disappointed about AOC. I thought Kamala was great and the best we had. Sure there were some mistakes, but there were things that were just not going well for Democrats in general. Latinos are huge voting block. The price of eggs are a big deal to them. The price of food is high. However, what was really weird was male Latinos. They did not like her and many went for Trump. I don't know if it was racism or because she was a woman. (Machismo?? Still??) Male Latinos in South Texas are generally not a progressive group, think "ranchero". (They like people like Henry Cuellar etc) I don't believe blue dog Vicente Gonzales endorsed Kamala. He was re-elected by a thin margin.
RockRaven
(17,109 posts)to express their ideas and values. That's the good stuff!
mahina
(19,630 posts)Are these from old DU friends? I sure hope not. My ignore list is growing.
Stout hearts
mucholderthandirt
(1,418 posts)Okay. Don't know what you expect to happen, because it's not going to change. So, are you leaving? If so, Bye, Felicia. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
It's up to the mod's to corral those being too bossy, maybe. What's the site rules for that? I don't know. I guess if they don't feel rules are broken, it's not going to be removed or edited.
I mean, I get tired of the TURN ON O'DONNEL/insert some show RIGHT NOW!. I don't like the drop and run video/article links. I don't click on just anything. But I've decided I can put people who do these things on ignore and get on with my life. I don't feel the need to drop a post like this to cry about it.
Buns_of_Fire
(18,276 posts)(I'm sorry. Sometimes the snark fairy taps me on the shoulder, and I must obey. )