Democratic Underground, or simply DU to its members, is a Liberalism in the United States/Progressivism virtual community established on January 20, 2001, the day President of the United States George W. Bush took office. The site Desktop publishing articles six days a week and has an online store, a directory of links, and Internet forum where logged-in members may post on various topics of interest. Nearly 70,000 forum accounts have been created since its inception with over 50,000 still remaining active. More than 15 million messages have been posted. Membership and participation are free, although voluntary donations are solicited, and some services are available only to donating members. ==Columns== DU has several regular column, and on any given day may have a number of guest columns sent in from contributors. *Mondays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/index.html Top Ten Conservative Idiots], a rundown of the most outrageous right-wing politics activities in the past week, according to the DU administrators. *Wednesdays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/plaidder/index.html The Plaid Adder] writes her column. *Thursdays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/auntie/index.html Ask Auntie Pinko], an 'advice' column. *Fridays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/bob/index.html Equal Time with Bob Boudelang], a satire column supposedly written by a United States Republican Party Team Leader. *Occasionally, DU will feature a [http://www.democraticunderground.com/mail/index.html Hate Mailbag] of hate mail. Bernard Weiner and Ernest Partridge of ''The Crisis Papers''[http://www.crisispapers.org/] are frequent guests. ==Forums== The DU Forums are a highly active scene where progressives of all types are welcome to come and talk. The site bills itself as welcoming to progressives of all types, though users are sometimes "Headstone" (banned) by administrators for violating site policies, such as these:
Talk:Democratic Underground/Archive One ==Text of first paragraph== * I'm tired of seeing an edit war develop about the text to use in the first paragraph of this article. I propose that we have a vote about whether to use the text "Liberal/Progressive" or "Democratic-Party Oriented." User:Acegikmo1 17:56, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC) ** The anonymous vandal might have been banned from DU for misconduct, and therefore has an axe to grind. S/he is clearly ignoring the consensus of the group, which is to (accuratly) described the forum as "liberal/progressive." By the way, the offical rules of the Democratic Underground forum state: ::"We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals. ::This is a "big tent" message board. We welcome a wide range of progressive opinion. You will likely encounter many points of view here that you disagree with. ::"We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned." [http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html#welcome] ::It's clear that this vandal is exactly that: a vandal. User:Neutrality 19:04, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC) Note this neutrality fellow is a big time poster there so his opinion is not without bias. I was in the claimed website for a while, wasn't banned, just disgusted that criticism of JK is not allowed so went inactive, the fact that they claim to allow all progressives is farce, yes, as long as you dont say anything bad about the democrats. It is not a liberal or progressive community since ideologically democratic party itself shies away from that label. In the interest of fairness to all those being misled by the website that's clearly propagandizing for Democrat's party, I ask you guys to label it 'democrat party' oriented. Plus the website is a LLC, that makes it even more appropriate to identify the website for what it is. :Nearly all people you ask will tell you it's a liberal discussion site. Liberals shy away from the term "liberal" due to its recent use as an insult, therefore the "progressive" label which DU self-applies. Furthermore, the term liberal can mean many things, including "Democrat" in the US. And in at least that sense, DU is definitely a liberal site. :Anyway you're inserting POV. You could add that critics believe it's not liberal in the true sense of the word, making sure to cite these critics. But you shouldn't change the article's first sentence in order to make a point. User:Rhobite 02:05, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC) == General form of the article == Is there a reason why the article is so long or includes such long quotes from the site? User:Ollieplatt 01:20, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I think we can presume that the article is the way it is because that is what the majority of editors think it should be. Meanwhile, I've noticed that you seem to be getting into a lot of trouble editing political articles; perhaps that's not your true calling on Wikipedia and your efforts should be directed elsewhere in the encyclopedia?. : User:Atlant 18:22, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) == Wikivandals == While I agree that the recent Wikivandalism by a few DU members isn't something worthy of mention in the article, I do think it's probably worth noting here the thread where they discuss their exploits: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2994204#2994296 User:Atlant 00:18, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) :If you want to note that, then this page should also note that other people on DU chastised the handful who were at fault. DU also locked the thread, presumably to discourage further such antics. User:JamesMLane 04:04, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I agree with James. This entire passage is just a big Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. It's too minor of an incident to include in the article - just a single (locked) thread. It's also quite POV - "they decided to begin an assault" makes it sound as if the entire membership of DU suddenly planned and executed a giant vandalism spree. User:NeutralityUser talk:Neutrality 05:56, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC) Here's the subsequent thread where additional folks disavow the Wikivandalism: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2996375 User:Atlant 23:00, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) == The I/P revert war == With regard to the revert war that's ongoing right now, the sad thing is that I'd accept the inclusion of the "anti-Israeli" language if it were put into the "criticism from the right" section of the article. But it surely isn't the lefties who forced the administrators to banish essentially *ALL* I/P discussion, even "Late Breaking News", to the I/P dungeon. :From what you say, it sounds like this doesn't belong as specifically criticism from the right or the left. The Middle East is often a special case. Perhaps we should create a separate subheading for it and say something like, "Disputes on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute became so rancorous that the site administrators have largely confined those discussions to the specific Israel-Palestine forum, prompting charges of censorship from both sides." Would that be accurate? User:JamesMLane 19:56, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) ::In my opinion, yes, your suggested statement would be accurate. Let's see what, if anything, everyone else has to say. ::User:Atlant 20:20, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) The present text is a reflection of an earlier edit war, in which a number of anonymous IPs were adding lengthy criticism, and some vandalism, attacking DU from the left; I believe I wrote the current text concerning anti-Palestinian bias. No one has suggested an anti-Israeli bias, so far as I'm aware, and I see no reason not to believe this is not a case of simple vandalism. But I'm also not a DU user, so my knowledge here is limited. User:Radicalsubversiv User talk:Radicalsubversiv 20:24, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I'm only a very occasional and casual visitor there myself. I have no personal knowledge of how this dispute has played itself out on the site. User:JamesMLane 21:19, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) Actually, there are a number of *VERY VOCAL* folks on DU who claim that an anti-Israeli bias exists at the site, but at least in my opinion, that's the same strategy as the Republicans constantly calling the media "liberal"; you can drive a medium towards your point of view by constantly attacking it for holding the other point of view, whether true or not. The medium reacts by constantly shifting towards your point of view in an attempt to placate you. User:Atlant 13:41, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ==Characterization of posts== In regards to my edits, there is nothing factually incorrect in my statement, and unless you consistently revert a similar statement made on the Free Republic page, I will put this statement back every time. ''(I moved this anon comment to its proper chron place and gave it a heading. User:JamesMLane 15:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC))'' :Characterizing the posts as insults is POV and inaccurate. The comment that posts are short is vague -- we've said it's a message board so no one would be expecting lengthy essays. I don't see that we need to assure the reader that there are posts of varying length; that's what anyone would expect. If there's something POV or inaccurate about the FR article, go fix it there. User:JamesMLane 15:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::"''I will put this statement back every time.''" ::Well, you've had your three reverts for one 24-hour period, so I'd strongly suggest you not put the statement back again today, or you're likely to find yourself blocked from editing Wikipedia for a while on a violation of the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. ::User:Atlant 15:48, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) == More emphasis needs to be made that the democratic underground completely bans dissenting opinion == You need to put more emphasis in the fact that the democraticunderground is one of the most censored message boards on the internet, free speech is not allowed there at all == Please Remove the Words Liberal and Progressive From This Page == The democraticunderground is neither liberal nor progressive because it bans and censors all differing opinions which is not liberal or progressive, this page is very one sided and biased towards the democraticunderground and not neutral at all :The way I see it, they can ban anyone they want. It's a private site. It's not Wikipedia's job to claim that a site can't possibly be liberal if it bans people who hold certain opinions. I also think that phrases such as "censorship" and "free speech" are pointless when speaking about a private web site. You don't have a God-given right to post to DU. :The opinions held by most DU posters are best described as liberal/progressive, so our description should stay. Feel free to increase the emphasis on DU's banning policy, just be sure to read up on WP:NPOV. User:Rhobite 06:06, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC) ::100% agreed to the first paragraph of Rhobite's post. Furthermore, this article is not the place to argue the definition of "liberal". Liberal is. - User:CheNuevara 04:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==John Conyers== I added him to the list of well-known participants. He made [http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3879052&mesg_id=3886311 this post] to DU. It's confirmed as genuine by [http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000142.htm this post] to his blog. User:JamesMLane 00:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Vague == This article is somewhat vague in its description of the actual content of the site. While I recognize the need for NPOV, I think this article could go much farther in its description of the site. A mission statement, for example -- the article says DU was started the day GW took office, but it doesn't say why (which is a matter of record publicly visible on the site). So long as editors quote, paraphrase, or summarize what -actually appears on the site-, its factual basis cannot be challenged because the text itself is clearly accessible. So, for example, saying that the site was founded "to protest George Bush's election to the presidency, which is characterized therein as 'illegitimate'" is perfectly in keeping with the NPOV requirements because such text occurs unequivocably on the site [http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html here]. With that in mind, I think some more information (not to be confused with commentary) ought to be included in this article. - User:CheNuevara 04:59, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Democratic_Underground:
Democratic_Underground
Democratic_Underground
Democratic_Underground/Archive_One
Democratic Underground
Democratic Underground, or simply DU to its members, is a Liberalism in the United States/Progressivism virtual community established on January 20, 2001, the day President of the United States George W. Bush took office. The site Desktop publishing articles six days a week and has an online store, a directory of links, and Internet forum where logged-in members may post on various topics of interest. Nearly 70,000 forum accounts have been created since its inception with over 50,000 still remaining active. More than 15 million messages have been posted. Membership and participation are free, although voluntary donations are solicited, and some services are available only to donating members. ==Columns== DU has several regular column, and on any given day may have a number of guest columns sent in from contributors. *Mondays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/index.html Top Ten Conservative Idiots], a rundown of the most outrageous right-wing politics activities in the past week, according to the DU administrators. *Wednesdays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/plaidder/index.html The Plaid Adder] writes her column. *Thursdays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/auntie/index.html Ask Auntie Pinko], an 'advice' column. *Fridays: [http://www.democraticunderground.com/bob/index.html Equal Time with Bob Boudelang], a satire column supposedly written by a United States Republican Party Team Leader. *Occasionally, DU will feature a [http://www.democraticunderground.com/mail/index.html Hate Mailbag] of hate mail. Bernard Weiner and Ernest Partridge of ''The Crisis Papers''[http://www.crisispapers.org/] are frequent guests. ==Forums== The DU Forums are a highly active scene where progressives of all types are welcome to come and talk. The site bills itself as welcoming to progressives of all types, though users are sometimes "Headstone" (banned) by administrators for violating site policies, such as these:
We ban Conservatism disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned.
Do not publicly accuse another member of this message board of being a disruptor, troll, conservative, Republican, or Free Republic. Do not try to come up with cute ways of skirting around the spirit of this rule. If you think someone is a disruptor, click the "Alert" link below their post so the moderators can deal with it. Unfortunately, it has become all too common for members of this message board to label anyone with a slightly different point of view as a disruptor. We disapprove of this behavior because its intent is to stifle discussion, enforce a particular "party line," and pre-emptively label a particular point of view as inappropriate or unwelcome. This makes thoughtful and open debate virtually impossible.
Democratic Underground is a "big tent" message board which welcomes a broad range of progressive opinions. As such, you are likely to disagree strongly with many of the comments you see expressed here. Please do not take these differences of opinion personally. The simple fact that someone disagrees with you does not give you the right to lash out and break the rules of this message board. A thick skin is usually required to participate on this or any message board.The main forums on DU have been re-arranged since the close of the 2004 US Election season. They now include: * Editorials and Other Articles * General Discussion * General Discussion: Politics (superseding "General Discussion: Campaign 2004") * Latest Breaking News * The Lounge (for general non-political discussion) Other forums include: * Individual forums for the discussion of state and local issues. * Individual forums for the discussion of certain political topics such as education, homeland security, and guns. * Individual forums for the discussion of certain relatively non-political topics such as books, science, and sports. * "Group" forums where chartered groups of users may discuss topics of mutual interest such as hobbies, fan clubs, and potential U.S. presidential election, 2008. * An "Ask the Administrators" forum was maintained until April 26, 2005; this forum allowed users to pose questions to the board administrators. This forum has now been shut down by the administrators, who felt that the forum was being used as a medium for people for to issue complaint after complaint, with the nature of their complaints being inflammatory. A "Rules" page, a "Frequently Asked Questions" page, and a "Contact the Administrators" page showing the email addresses of the administrators have been substituted. Two of the most controversial forums are often scenes of hot debate between posters: * The Justice/Public Safety board, used for discussing Gun politics issues and commonly referred to as the "Gun Dungeon" or "Gungeon"; and * The Israel-Palestinian affairs board, sometimes referred to as the "Basement." ==Notable members== Several notable figures have posted in the forums at some point. Among those who have been verified as not being hoaxes are: *Wes Clark, Jr., the son of Wesley Clark; *John Conyers, member of the United States House of Representatives; *Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of John Edwards; *Christopher Heinz, a son of Teresa Heinz Kerry; and *William Rivers Pitt, a liberal activist, author, and owner of Truthout.org. ==Owners== The website is owned by Democratic Underground, LLC (a limited liability company), which is in turn owned by David Allen of Washington, D.C. He goes by the user name "Skinner" while on the boards and handles most of the issues relating to the forums. The other two administrators, "EarlG" (of Washington, D.C.) and "elad" (of Chicago), handle the articles and technical issues, respectively. ==Campaign Underground== DU has an online Political campaign headquarters named "Campaign Underground." The site, which was put together with help from DU members, features a database of information about campaigns, voting trends, and media. A "media blaster" feature provides the ability to email local media outlets in many United States cities. Eventually DU hopes to have other features, such as integrated local news from the forums, a local event calendar, and other issues specific to states and locals. ==Demopedia== On December 7, 2004, DU launched the beta of Demopedia, a wiki based collaborative project aimed to present the Democratic and progressive opinion and outlook. During the beta, only users who had registered at DU before December 7 were able to contribute. It uses the MediaWiki software. ==Criticism== As with any politically charged website, there are many charges made against Democratic Underground from both the political Left and the Right. ===From the left=== Critics of the site allege that the site administrators and moderators are biased against, and unfairly ban ("tombstone") or censorship, posters who consider themselves to be to the political Left-wing politics of John Kerry, the 2004 United States Democratic Party nominee for the US presidency. Some critics are affiliated with the People for Change forums, which were founded by Howard Dean supporters who felt alienated from Democratic Underground during the contentious primary season; many of these posters had been banned or were later banned from the Democratic Underground forums. These people claim that DU is not truly liberal or Progressivism, but rather centrist. In particular, many members claim that the moderators of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict forums enforce an anti-Palestinian bias or adhere too strongly to the politics of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). ===From the right=== Conservatives/right-wingers often criticize Democratic Underground for removing comments and banning users who don't fit the site's left-wing stance. Because most of the the site's forums can be posted-to by anyone who has registered at the site, outlandish postings by some members are occasionally held up as an example of what the forum's membership believes as a whole. The lastest example of this were postings regarding alleged causes of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake; while the threads were eventually locked and publicly disavowed by the site's administrators, the postings in question were reported by ''The New York Times'' and Fox News. ==Member avatars== Registered members can select an Avatar (virtual reality) that will be displayed along with each of their postings. For donating members, this avatar can be a custom image that they have supplied; non-donating members can choose from a set of standard images that include popular symbols, images of political figures or popular culture figures, and state outlines, state flags, and a few national flags. These avatars allow users to show some of their personality with each posting. After the U.S. presidential election, 2004, many members displayed an upside-down American flag as their avatar; an inverted flag is an international symbol of distress. ==External links== *[http://www.democraticunderground.com Democratic Underground Homepage] *[http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/ DU Forums] *[http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/ DU Demopedia] *[http://www.democraticunderground.com/cu Campaign Underground] *[http://dummiefunnies.blogspot.com/ DUmmie FUnnies] - conservative satire of DU Internet forums
Democratic Underground
Talk:Democratic Underground/Archive One ==Text of first paragraph== * I'm tired of seeing an edit war develop about the text to use in the first paragraph of this article. I propose that we have a vote about whether to use the text "Liberal/Progressive" or "Democratic-Party Oriented." User:Acegikmo1 17:56, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC) ** The anonymous vandal might have been banned from DU for misconduct, and therefore has an axe to grind. S/he is clearly ignoring the consensus of the group, which is to (accuratly) described the forum as "liberal/progressive." By the way, the offical rules of the Democratic Underground forum state: ::"We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals. ::This is a "big tent" message board. We welcome a wide range of progressive opinion. You will likely encounter many points of view here that you disagree with. ::"We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned." [http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html#welcome] ::It's clear that this vandal is exactly that: a vandal. User:Neutrality 19:04, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC) Note this neutrality fellow is a big time poster there so his opinion is not without bias. I was in the claimed website for a while, wasn't banned, just disgusted that criticism of JK is not allowed so went inactive, the fact that they claim to allow all progressives is farce, yes, as long as you dont say anything bad about the democrats. It is not a liberal or progressive community since ideologically democratic party itself shies away from that label. In the interest of fairness to all those being misled by the website that's clearly propagandizing for Democrat's party, I ask you guys to label it 'democrat party' oriented. Plus the website is a LLC, that makes it even more appropriate to identify the website for what it is. :Nearly all people you ask will tell you it's a liberal discussion site. Liberals shy away from the term "liberal" due to its recent use as an insult, therefore the "progressive" label which DU self-applies. Furthermore, the term liberal can mean many things, including "Democrat" in the US. And in at least that sense, DU is definitely a liberal site. :Anyway you're inserting POV. You could add that critics believe it's not liberal in the true sense of the word, making sure to cite these critics. But you shouldn't change the article's first sentence in order to make a point. User:Rhobite 02:05, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC) == General form of the article == Is there a reason why the article is so long or includes such long quotes from the site? User:Ollieplatt 01:20, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I think we can presume that the article is the way it is because that is what the majority of editors think it should be. Meanwhile, I've noticed that you seem to be getting into a lot of trouble editing political articles; perhaps that's not your true calling on Wikipedia and your efforts should be directed elsewhere in the encyclopedia?. : User:Atlant 18:22, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) == Wikivandals == While I agree that the recent Wikivandalism by a few DU members isn't something worthy of mention in the article, I do think it's probably worth noting here the thread where they discuss their exploits: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2994204#2994296 User:Atlant 00:18, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) :If you want to note that, then this page should also note that other people on DU chastised the handful who were at fault. DU also locked the thread, presumably to discourage further such antics. User:JamesMLane 04:04, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I agree with James. This entire passage is just a big Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. It's too minor of an incident to include in the article - just a single (locked) thread. It's also quite POV - "they decided to begin an assault" makes it sound as if the entire membership of DU suddenly planned and executed a giant vandalism spree. User:NeutralityUser talk:Neutrality 05:56, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC) Here's the subsequent thread where additional folks disavow the Wikivandalism: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2996375 User:Atlant 23:00, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) == The I/P revert war == With regard to the revert war that's ongoing right now, the sad thing is that I'd accept the inclusion of the "anti-Israeli" language if it were put into the "criticism from the right" section of the article. But it surely isn't the lefties who forced the administrators to banish essentially *ALL* I/P discussion, even "Late Breaking News", to the I/P dungeon. :From what you say, it sounds like this doesn't belong as specifically criticism from the right or the left. The Middle East is often a special case. Perhaps we should create a separate subheading for it and say something like, "Disputes on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute became so rancorous that the site administrators have largely confined those discussions to the specific Israel-Palestine forum, prompting charges of censorship from both sides." Would that be accurate? User:JamesMLane 19:56, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) ::In my opinion, yes, your suggested statement would be accurate. Let's see what, if anything, everyone else has to say. ::User:Atlant 20:20, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) The present text is a reflection of an earlier edit war, in which a number of anonymous IPs were adding lengthy criticism, and some vandalism, attacking DU from the left; I believe I wrote the current text concerning anti-Palestinian bias. No one has suggested an anti-Israeli bias, so far as I'm aware, and I see no reason not to believe this is not a case of simple vandalism. But I'm also not a DU user, so my knowledge here is limited. User:Radicalsubversiv User talk:Radicalsubversiv 20:24, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) :I'm only a very occasional and casual visitor there myself. I have no personal knowledge of how this dispute has played itself out on the site. User:JamesMLane 21:19, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) Actually, there are a number of *VERY VOCAL* folks on DU who claim that an anti-Israeli bias exists at the site, but at least in my opinion, that's the same strategy as the Republicans constantly calling the media "liberal"; you can drive a medium towards your point of view by constantly attacking it for holding the other point of view, whether true or not. The medium reacts by constantly shifting towards your point of view in an attempt to placate you. User:Atlant 13:41, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ==Characterization of posts== In regards to my edits, there is nothing factually incorrect in my statement, and unless you consistently revert a similar statement made on the Free Republic page, I will put this statement back every time. ''(I moved this anon comment to its proper chron place and gave it a heading. User:JamesMLane 15:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC))'' :Characterizing the posts as insults is POV and inaccurate. The comment that posts are short is vague -- we've said it's a message board so no one would be expecting lengthy essays. I don't see that we need to assure the reader that there are posts of varying length; that's what anyone would expect. If there's something POV or inaccurate about the FR article, go fix it there. User:JamesMLane 15:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::"''I will put this statement back every time.''" ::Well, you've had your three reverts for one 24-hour period, so I'd strongly suggest you not put the statement back again today, or you're likely to find yourself blocked from editing Wikipedia for a while on a violation of the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. ::User:Atlant 15:48, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) == More emphasis needs to be made that the democratic underground completely bans dissenting opinion == You need to put more emphasis in the fact that the democraticunderground is one of the most censored message boards on the internet, free speech is not allowed there at all == Please Remove the Words Liberal and Progressive From This Page == The democraticunderground is neither liberal nor progressive because it bans and censors all differing opinions which is not liberal or progressive, this page is very one sided and biased towards the democraticunderground and not neutral at all :The way I see it, they can ban anyone they want. It's a private site. It's not Wikipedia's job to claim that a site can't possibly be liberal if it bans people who hold certain opinions. I also think that phrases such as "censorship" and "free speech" are pointless when speaking about a private web site. You don't have a God-given right to post to DU. :The opinions held by most DU posters are best described as liberal/progressive, so our description should stay. Feel free to increase the emphasis on DU's banning policy, just be sure to read up on WP:NPOV. User:Rhobite 06:06, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC) ::100% agreed to the first paragraph of Rhobite's post. Furthermore, this article is not the place to argue the definition of "liberal". Liberal is. - User:CheNuevara 04:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==John Conyers== I added him to the list of well-known participants. He made [http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3879052&mesg_id=3886311 this post] to DU. It's confirmed as genuine by [http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000142.htm this post] to his blog. User:JamesMLane 00:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Vague == This article is somewhat vague in its description of the actual content of the site. While I recognize the need for NPOV, I think this article could go much farther in its description of the site. A mission statement, for example -- the article says DU was started the day GW took office, but it doesn't say why (which is a matter of record publicly visible on the site). So long as editors quote, paraphrase, or summarize what -actually appears on the site-, its factual basis cannot be challenged because the text itself is clearly accessible. So, for example, saying that the site was founded "to protest George Bush's election to the presidency, which is characterized therein as 'illegitimate'" is perfectly in keeping with the NPOV requirements because such text occurs unequivocably on the site [http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html here]. With that in mind, I think some more information (not to be confused with commentary) ought to be included in this article. - User:CheNuevara 04:59, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
D
DA | DB | DC | DE | DF | DG | DH | DI | DJ | DK | DL | DM | DN | DO | DP | DR | DS | DT | DU | DW | DX | DY | DZ |Words begining with Democratic_Underground:
Democratic_Underground
Democratic_Underground
Democratic_Underground/Archive_One
Sponsored links: praca, nurkowanie.
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
