I've been reading most if not all of the threads about DU3 and the concerns people said they had. I've looked at the responses, too. If you're reading this you probably have as well, and you've also probably found it impossible to miss the tone and the subtext in it all.

I don't think this really has much to do with DU3. It seems to have a lot more to do with unresolved business about DU2 and the nature of DU in general.

Two simple points, which combined are causing a lot of frustration out there, IMO:

First, this website has an overwhelmingly liberal userbase. Classic, bleeding-heart (I say that as a compliment) liberal. Go look at the Greatest Page any day of the week if you doubt it. After years of reading DU, I think most of us are probably more liberal in our opinions than when we first came here. That's true for me, anyway. And that naturally causes a conflict with and criticism of President Obama and the Democratic Party in some circumstances. So there's already a source of friction there and it's not trivial.

Second, over the history of DU there have been a number of famously malignant personalities which seem to thrive on conflict with other users. Everyone knows their names and the list is long if you've been here a while. I don't mean people who simply have a differing viewpoint, I mean people who expend a great deal of energy to regularly inject themselves in unpleasant ways into discussions. And who clearly and openly relish the unpleasantness with which they do it. In my experience, it takes quite a few people to really promote a topic of discussion but just a few to stifle it, if they are determined enough.

Some very well-known users literally did this for years and years before being shown the door. Would it be controversial to assert that some of those types of personalities might still remain and that almost everyone would be familiar with their names and behavior- from regular readers of DU, to the moderators, to the Administrators?

We all read the same site, after all. We all see the same things.

Those two aspects have mixed together in some very unhealthy ways, which are also no secret to anyone: While there are many users here who legitimately agree with and defend the President and Party from criticism, it's easy to imagine how a malignant personality could find a goldmine in conflict and a safe harbor of sorts by propping themselves up as an uncivil, nasty "defender" of policies openly derided here for almost a decade during the Bush administration.

A foil against most of the userbase for maximum headbutting enjoyment, and all under the guise of supporting the core tenets of this website.

It's an almost airtight racket, if you think about it.

I think a major concern with DU3 is how a personality (like the one I describe) will game the system and leverage the new tools to cause even more havoc.

While the Administrators have done a yeoman's job explaining the technical aspects of DU3, it might be worth explaining to the userbase specifically how those new features will help curtail the dynamic I describe above and really make DU3 a healthier environment to hold discussions in. For instance, I believe a host may lock a thread and the only way to unlock it is to plead your case to the host who locked it. If, by some random chance, one of these personalities winds up in a host position, well, see the potential for problems there?

PB

p.s. As I've yet not accepted the Privacy Policy for DU3. I am unable to post this message there.

p.p.s. There is a certain grim and apathetic part of me that believes this post will be locked as quickly and as surely as if I'd filled it with slurs and links to pornographic images- that it will be locked in less time than it takes to read it. It's the other part of me, the one that thinks there's a possibility of repairing things by speaking openly about a situation everyone is aware of...that's the piece of me that's hitting the "Post message" button.