because I've been wondering the same thing.

for my own understanding the system and how people think, I WANT TO KNOW THE OUTCOME.
I just opted out. They can use people who don't give a darn.

to let this model roll for awhile.

wanted to see the entire thread and couldn't (to help understand more of context)
voted anyway
and just now googled to find the thread
turns out i'm okay with the way i voted
but still.....


when did this jury stuff change? today?

[font color = blue]>>when did this jury stuff change? today?<<[/font]

Per some Skinner posting I probably can't find. I got my first "new jury" Monday around 4pm CT.

Towards the bottom is the new jury stuff
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1013&pid=6548

I'm concerned about not being able to see the who,e thread also. I don't like the idea that I might be taking a post out of context.

I'll stick with it awhile longer.

very few things in life are black and white, which is why we have sorta maybe ish answers and that is fine, but I want to explain why I think it is so, even if no one cares what I think.
So many people don't understand the difference between real news and bashing. Between valid sources and republican meme. someone is just going to think - this person is partisan - and dismiss the vote. And not being able to see the vote who knows what others think.

In the latest jury I was on, someone objected to something written in the NYTimes as being partisan. Well, yes the times can be partisan, but in this case they were complementary toward the democrat, not insulting. I could not figure out why the person was objecting, they said it was insulting and I think they must have read it wrong. Since every single time I sign on here, I get called on jury, I think there is learning process on what to report, why would you report a complement?

Why didnt they just enforce it? So because SOME people got rude in their comments, NONE of us get to make them? SIlly

You can't see the thread or the person alerting, so it hard to get context. Plus, you don't even get to see the results of the decision. I'll probably opt out soon.

but conte4xt is useful in evaluating, out of context, you have no real idea why the person replied like they did.

To many jurys were to willing to put up with to much shit because they saw other people in the thread doing it this way you pretty much are focused on one thing and one thing only and that is did the post break the ToS?
Heck one jury I was on I voted to hide a host, didnt know they were a host which is good because if I had i might have voted not to hide but the fact is I didnt know thus it didnt sway my opinion that they broke the ToS.

they should find a better way