No DU user deserves to be shot.
Normal people don't think this way.
what part(s) of Stone Space's normal behavior suggest to normal people that he needs to be shot?
Why does not not correct that bad behavior that even he recognizes as bad?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=193067
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Squinch
(52,745 posts)This is disgusting.
stone space
(6,498 posts)On Tue May 10, 2016, 09:54 PM you sent an alert on the following post:
One really has to wonder
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=193067
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
YOUR COMMENTS
Nobody needs to be shot.
Please hide.
JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue May 10, 2016, 10:05 PM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: People make mean and nasty comments to each other all the time on DU. Implying (and yes, that's what's happening here, we aren't stupid) that the OP deserves to be shot is beyond disgusting.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Give me a break.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't think the OP suggested anyone should be shot, quite the opposite.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you.
stone space
(6,498 posts)Last edited Fri May 13, 2016, 02:01 PM - Edit history (2)
My point was that Stone Space says Stone Space needs to be shot. I was wondering why he would say that.
The reading comprehension of the three jurors is also in question.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=193091
Obviously, I have never claimed that I need to be shot, and the post is a blatant lie.
I don't understand why things like this are allowed to stand here on DU.
Nor do I understand why that poster is still listed as "active", after making such a post, and then doubling down on it with a new claim that I was the author, not him.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)stone space
(6,498 posts)No response yet, although the second one was just posted today.
jimmy the one
(2,717 posts)Not really sure who's who on this one, but sounds like an adversarial GN perhaps; do you use the jury blacklist feature? where you can block selected members of DU from sitting on any jury in response to an alert to your post? Of course can't block them all you know.
I think you can block 15 adversarial members if star member, 5 or 10 if not. (IE those that would find you guilty no matter what).
I think click on profile or something up there, account etc.
This might make for an awareness OP, leave it up to FL.
Well you won anyway, but too close for comfort.
