Regarding the new forum that I proposed recently...
In a recent announcement I noted that we were considering opening a new top-level forum to discuss the future of the Democratic Party, and where the left goes from here.
We have had "floating" top-level forums in the past -- you may remember the old "General Discussion: Politics" forum from years ago, or the various primary and election post-mortem forums that we've set up from time to time when needed -- so this is not unprecedented.
Now that Trump has returned to the White House as a lame duck, but with heightened powers and clearly intent on revenge, the paradigm has shifted significantly. The Democratic Party is looking to new, younger leaders, and seeking new strategies and ideas to compete in the age of Trump. We should be able to talk about those new ideas here.
In addition, we have already seen numerous discussions expressing dissatisfaction with the way some Democrats have been handling the presidential transition period, and it's likely that these discussions will continue after Trump takes office. I believe that we should not be afraid to have these discussions either, as Democrats chart a new course forward.
So I'm not proposing a new forum because I want to bury the conversation -- on the contrary, I think this is a conversation we should very much be having, which is why I think this should be a top-level forum. But I'm mindful of the fact that not all DUers appreciate this kind of discussion, so moving them out of General Discussion for the most part, and giving them their own space, seems like it would be helpful to both the people who want to participate, and the people who don't.
Concerns about the rules
I suspect that some of you may have questions about how the "Don't Bash Democratic Public Figures" rule might be enforced in such a forum. As you know, we employ a unique community moderation system which relies on the input of all members, which means that the system slowly evolves and changes over time to reflect the overall feelings of the community. It's been clear over the past eight years that the community at large has been far less tolerant of criticism of Democrats, and I totally get that. For the past eight years the Democratic rank-and-file has been unusually united due to the threat of Donald Trump.
But we are entering new territory now. Assuming America is still America by then (unfortunately, an assumption that may prove flawed) we will have mid-terms in 2026, and then both parties will engage in lengthy, combative primaries, with a large cast of characters seeking to replace the old guard. All of this is likely to bring more contentious discussions to DU.
With that said, bear in mind that the current DU rules were created during an extremely contentious time -- the aftermath of the 2016 primaries -- and they were written specifically to handle these kinds of debates.
If you take a look at the "Don't Bash Democratic Public Figures" rule, it's split into two parts. The second part deals entirely with criticism of Democrats during election season.
Right now, we are about as far away from an election as it is possible to get, so the above section is not particularly relevant. Now let's look at the first section of the rule:
This is just common sense. We have people with many differing points of view on DU, and people have a variety of feelings about Democratic politicians. But we're not going to be able to have a sensible debate if people are throwing out things like "Genocide Joe" or "Fuck Bernie Sanders." That is explicitly what this rule is intended to combat.
In fact, if you look at the section of the rule called, Why we have this rule, it says this:
So when handling appeals on removed posts in the new forum, I would certainly err on the side of allowing critical discussion -- since that would essentially be the purpose of the forum -- while prohibiting outright bashing. (As ever though, Juries will determine where the "fuzzy line" of acceptability is, so the more extreme your comments, the more you take your chances with a Jury.)
A name for the new forum
Assuming people are still up for this idea, here's where I'd like to get your suggestions. If anyone has an idea for a new name for this forum, please reply and let me know! If we get a number of good suggestions and I can't decide which is best, I may put it up for a vote. Just bear in mind that the name should be concise.
Thanks for reading!
(PS. Since this is an Admin-led debate about DU policies and one rule in particular, you may consider the "Don't interfere with forum moderation" rule temporarily suspended on this thread. That said, I would very much appreciate it if people could make the effort to keep the discussion on topic.)
= new reply since forum marked as read
Thanks for your positivity.
we have a Democratic president and Democratic majority in the Senate. How did they get there?
I'm so sick of the negativity and "give up" attitude around here. 
This kind of sorry-assed tail between your legs attitude gets nobody anywhere.
"F**k repugs" is probably out of the running.
seen so much of the last few days is Going Out of the Way to Bash Dems & Dem Public Figures.
Like a free for all and it's very Disheartening. 
Imagine how our Leaders on the Front Lines, trying to Hold Back Fascism, Feel.
Thank You & Elad for All You're Doing to Turn This Ship Around! 
Rec’d
Thanks Earlg et al for all you admins do
“From Skinner Mode”. 
Have a good holiday - if you can!!
That’s my mantra this year.
… So dejected I can’t say happy anything!
The first rule of Fight Club is "you do not talk about Fight Club.". 
Response to EarlG (Original post)
Response to sheshe2 (Reply #105)
Start your own.
The big advice, Democrats should:
be more like Republicans
shouldn't only be "we're not Republicans"
shouldn't be Republican lite neoliberal neoliberal neoliberal
should've stopped all the bad things, that means they didn't want to
are to blame for every bad thing that has happened in the last 40 years at least
people whine about search for Goldilocks magic messaging words that don't exist and cling to conviction magical stern speeches promising to "stand up to" and "fight for" will instantly make voters stop voting against their own economic advantage -- it's easy -- words, not actually doing anything (incrementalism bad) are the most important thing
rich liberals must buy a nation-wide media empire like Republicans have been building since the 70s and force everyone to listen -- easy! while demonizing wealthy people as cartoon villains
if Democrats talk too much about accompaniments they are dumb and think everything's fixed and don't have to do anymore and must be harshly scolded (teach them a lesson)
even though the less money people have the more likely they vote for Democrats, the party is all wealthy elites with no idea of who the American working class is
Obama and Biden administrations were most diverse and progressive up to that point in history (Kamal's would've been too) but lying and calling them old centrist elites who must be replaced made it true
get polarization started early and haul all the insults for Democrats out of the closet, especially "establishment" -- vital to create a fake different between Democrats (corrupt establishment elites) and "progressives" (anti-establishment morally pure) for the next election (when goals are the same viciously attack other ways to accomplish them with purity tests -- they'll do it with Medicare for All again) -- and never mention Republicans control Congress (never mention reality in general)
whine about Democrats not giving away their plans for the future in public to enemies -- assume nothing is being done and nobody is doing anything
waste of time
Redirecting or Redirection? Not sure that really works but it seems we have our bearings but can never quite get a strong collective going. May not make sense, got a nasty head cold and am emersed in TOMMY at the moment but our direction is correct just never really solid or strong enough to stand on. We will have to fight this out and it will not be pretty but I think this is an excellent idea. It will be helpful for our party to not be in such a mess all the time and hopefully we would come out with firm ideas that include all of us.
I wanted to participate but I have a head full of cotton and a throat full of ick so I hope there was something here. Back to The Who and Tommy. 
1 more thing. The redirection thing is basically for us to all hash it out and bring it to our leaders. That might help all of us to feel the part we play is important because it is supposed to be everything and it rarely does it feel that way. We need to figure it out. We can I think the other side, the lazy voter part, has mostly given up and just votes for the worst and to them that is the best then they can rest. We can't let that happen to us.
New times, lets direct them. We have our groups already we just need to direct them and get solid. I hope this does not sound like the overdose of cold medicine I took an hour ago!
