Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Feminists
In reply to the discussion: My thoughts on Neoma's actions (as if they matter at all) [View all]boston bean
(36,795 posts)4. No, that is one I know for a fact that is wrong.
Let me try to be more clear, cause this really isn't fun, and it's a pain in my ass, but here you go.
First off both links you provide are not to any statement I made. I am the one who called for the election. No one else, ok.
Secondly, the first link is not at all clear it means what you say it means. It made no impact on me at the time. It was a response to my post:
Here is exchange, that you believe is the smoking gun that I was malicious in my intent to hold elections only for three days so Neoma wouldn't be able to rally her troops:
My post:
Boston Bean 23. I disagree.
Some people have already expressed the need for a new beginning. I see no reason to wait.
I think three days is good, as it's not to long and drawn out. then we can get back to the issues that concern us all.
Some people have already expressed the need for a new beginning. I see no reason to wait.
I think three days is good, as it's not to long and drawn out. then we can get back to the issues that concern us all.
Response:
41. I totally agree with Boston Bean --
calls to "wait," and "no reason to vote now" only delay getting the forum (Group) back to normal. And IF things are happening behind the Group's back, there's a lot less chance for that to happen and bear fruit.
VOTE NOW.
calls to "wait," and "no reason to vote now" only delay getting the forum (Group) back to normal. And IF things are happening behind the Group's back, there's a lot less chance for that to happen and bear fruit.
VOTE NOW.
Wow, you got that from that reply to me. Please..
The second link you provided again is not to a post that I made. But I will address it again for you. I wrote this 4-5 hours after the call for the election:
118. I truly hope that the objections about having this election now versus a week from now
aren't being used to try to stack the deck of what someone might call a "member" or to rally troops to try and overcome the real will of the members of this group as it stands today.
People who have posted here prior and have been members here prior to today, should be voting. All others, I would hope that they would use their conscience and not try to stack a vote.
aren't being used to try to stack the deck of what someone might call a "member" or to rally troops to try and overcome the real will of the members of this group as it stands today.
People who have posted here prior and have been members here prior to today, should be voting. All others, I would hope that they would use their conscience and not try to stack a vote.
And here was a posters response to me, which you linked to:
143. that's exactly what is happening.
all these people who never gave a shit about the forum/group before are now all hot to come see the cat fight! hahahahahaha let's go watch the silly women, can't even run their own forum.
subscribers to this group had a big increase today ... wonder where they're all coming from? and of course the longer the vote is delayed, the more the troops are rallied from outside this forum.
you know it, i know, "they" know it.
all these people who never gave a shit about the forum/group before are now all hot to come see the cat fight! hahahahahaha let's go watch the silly women, can't even run their own forum.
subscribers to this group had a big increase today ... wonder where they're all coming from? and of course the longer the vote is delayed, the more the troops are rallied from outside this forum.
you know it, i know, "they" know it.
And I suggest you read my responses listed here very carefully, because they do not mean what you say they mean. In fact, I didn't mention neoma, my focus was on the integrity of the election, which I think is reasonable, since we found that 30 new members had joined that day.
So yeah, you are wrong, and you have not right to make insidious allegations about me. Or what you might think was my thought process. You see what's wrong here. You are no help, when you do that. The entire credibility of your post goes down the drain, imho.
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

this is where the problem arises. you can now say this forever more and it will still come back to
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#11
we had an election just a month ago. it stayed open for a couple weeks. redqueen was elected hands
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#15
What you are saying here was said in the post, but the reasoning was different than
boston bean
Feb 2012
#16
What you seem to be missing is I made two separate statements about the elections
justiceischeap
Feb 2012
#20
you cannot just create a story that there was lack of trust, without some kind of reasoning for
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#31
i could say the moon is blue, that is why i.... there was no reasons for her not to trust us
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#35
we had a number of members and host suggest trickster get blocked. he has a number of
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#37
if she refuses to adhere to SoP, if she refuses to listen to co hosts and members, if she suggests
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#45
It's a little known fact - but "calling out" people is not against the TOS in DU3
kdmorris
Feb 2012
#3
one of my sins, per neoma, is i quoted a poster that called us "fucking bigots". jury allowed
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#6
poster said no name calling, calling out allowed. yes, i was speaking to kdmorris. nt
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#9
because i disagree with you, or others i am feeding the flames. yet, for people that hold a
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#13
this would be an example of what i am talking about. "i have not tied my star to anyone."
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#27
you will hear me correct nontruths. in you perception that is defending her. in mine,
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#48
i am not running away from wht was posted on the site. i am stating, your interpretation
seabeyond
Feb 2012
#50