Email daniel@disqus.com and ask why gold star nominations are decided by an exclusive group on The Clubhouse instead of being open to all community members to nominate. If gold stars are supposed to represent the community then why doesn't the community have a say? Why is an exclusive group the only ones allowed to nominate and express their opinion? All this does is create a group or friends expanding their control over Disqus.

I got this in my email:
"Okay here is my official request.

"Name that pet"

Let's start a thread to give all the Disqus pets proper pet names. Then we can start using those names when we are referring to them. Since Disqus turns a blind eye to the pets doing this it should be acceptable for us to do this as well."

Something I am seeing more of on Disqus is bait threads. Do you think this is a coincidence?
Christian vs atheist.
Feminist vs anti-fems.
Conservatives vs liberals.
The pets communicate on Slack organizing ways to create dissension. They keep track of what sets off arguments between CM's so they can use this information to make CM's get into arguments attacking one another, and it is working.
If we continue attacking one another then we are no longer working towards solving the problems with Disqus.
Instead of taking the bait walk away from the arguments so that the pets don't win. Otherwise nothing will change and they just make fools out of all of us.

https://disqus.com/home/channel/uncensorednewsandviews/discussion/channel-uncensorednewsandviews/targeted_harassment_or_encouraging_others_to_do_so_is_this_leftist_speak_for_censoring_opposing_opin/

As usual Disqus employees censor someone when that person says anything on Disqus about a Disqus employees friend. Yet Disqus employees still have not made any effort to remove comments and treads that their friends have made attacking community members.

Targeted harassment or encouraging others to do so: IS this leftist speak for Censoring opposing opinions

423 Comments

Freedom 
@disqus_IvQm81KrLz 2 days ago

So I get this in the mail after sending abuse reports to Disqus about duck, gamatini, and sam J and their socks appellation, mantis, and barginbobs trolling of my channel and attacks against people posting on the channel.

|We’re reaching out to inform you that a discussion you posted has been found to be violating the Disqus Basic Rules and has been removed from public discussion. Here’s the discussion that was removed:

https://disqus.com/home/channe...

This discussion contains content that violates the Targeted harassment or encouraging others to do so section of our Basic Rules

Here’s the relevant part of that section: “The targeted and systematic harassment of people has no place on Disqus, nor do we tolerate communities dedicated to fostering harassing behavior.”

Please be sure that all future comments and discussions posted by your account do not include harassing content or content that directs others to harass others on Disqus. Any future terms of service violations may result in banning or account deletion.

If you have any questions or pertinent information regarding this case, you can contact us by replying to this email or starting a new support case at http://disqus.com/support.|

So is the same thing as the Safe speech zones now popping up on colleges nationwide.

Take the time to read the ToS and Disqus guidelines carefully. What they say is that each person is responsible for their own actions and words. Channel creators and mods can deal with violations if they chose to do so, however it is not a requirement. It is the responsibility of Disqus employees to deal with violations. Disqus employees allow people to believe this misconception because it takes the heat off of them when they do not enforce ToS or policy. Disqus employees are responsible for dealing with report user complaints, harassment and any other problems. Channel creators and mods doing so is optional.
The reason this is not enforced by Disqus employees is because Disqus employees responsible for dealing with complaints  have formed friendships with some community members which creates a conflict of interest that interferes with them doing their job correctly.
Disqus needs to have employees who do not have channels and do not interact with the community handling these complaints so they are dealt with appropriately. As long as Disqus employees handling the complaints are friends with community members the problems will not be dealt with appropriately.

"All-Stars are the star contributors of Disqus. If you’ve come across them, you know they have a lot to say in their comments and discussions. They stand out for bringing their authenticity, knowledge, and personality to communities. Often, they are the hearts of the community and what makes this corner of the Internet a special place to be."
All-stars was originally meant to be a reward for community members who made a positive contribution to Disqus. Now it is rapidly becoming an exclusive club for friends of Saeeds to use their friendship with him to harass community members with impunity. Since all-stars are nominated by other all-stars they can chose who is allowed into the exclusive club. 
Disqus could open up the all-star nominations to the entire community by putting the nominations on Disqus Announcements, but then Saeed and his friends would no longer control who is rewarded.
Being an all-star who is also Saeeds friend allows the special privileges like saying and doing whatever they want without losing their god star, even if they repeatedly disrupt Disqus, violate policies, threaten community members or openly attack community members.
Discus.com has a decent concept that is being destroyed by an employee protecting his friends and allowing them to do as they wish without consequences.
These gold stars have proven time and time again that they should no longer have gold stars, gmartini, leslie.lanister, SamJ and Coccyx. Yet Saeed will not remove their gold stars because they are his friends. 
Disqus needs to handle their employees lack of interest in doing his job.

Disqus employees have pet community members that they protect. These community members can do whatever they want without being held accountable for their words and actions.
Originally it was only 4 community members that were allowed to terrorize other Disqus community members, but  that number has grown as their behavior has gone unchecked by Saeed Oday. This group brags about communicating with one another to orchestrate these attacks on community members. They threaten anyone who stands up to them. They know they can do this because Saeed Oday will protect them.
Community members can stop using Disqus or limit their access to a few Disqus channels where they are not attacked by gmartini, leslie.lanister, SamJ and Coccyx or their followers. Why should community members be forced to do either in order to avoid this pack of bullies?
Disqus has been saying they are working on a block option for years now. If a software company that was established in 2007 can not implement a simple block feature on their comment hosting service then they need to hire new programmers and code writers or find a new business.

Disqus has a policy that  personal attacks and harassment are a violation. However a community member named Coccyx circumvents this policy by creating satire using nicknames. The attacks are a violation of Disqus policy yet Coccyx is allowed to continue simply because she is friends with the Disqus employee, Sayeed Oday, who is responsible for enforcing the policies.
Disqus constantly updates policy which is a waste of time as the policies already in place are not enforced.
Just one more example of how Disqus ignores problems.
Disqus will not deal with these problems unless they are forced to realize Disqus.com is part of their company and what happens on Disqus.com has an effect on that company. The only way this will happen is if people make it known publicly that Disqus continues to ignore cyber bullying, personal attacks and harassment.

Definition of a cyber bully:
They see it as a way to stay popular.
Hurting others makes them feel powerful.
It helps them cope with their own low self-esteem.
They think it will help them fit in with their peers.
They have trouble empathizing with those they hurt.
Anonymity—Cyberbullying allows bullies to avoid facing their victims, so it requires less courage and provides the illusion that bullies
won’t get caught.
Ignorance of the consequences—The National Council on Crime Prevention reports that in a survey of teenagers, 81% said they believe others
cyberbully because they think it’s funny. Because they don’t see their victims’ reactions in person, cyberbullies may not realize how much
amage they are doing.
Social pressure—Some cyberbullies may think their behavior is normal and socially acceptable, especially when friends egg them on.
2. Power. In this case, people who bully are trying to show others how powerful they are. They want to make others do what they want and
have control over them. They want others to be fearful of them. Often this is because in the off-line world, they have been bullied or
victimized themselves. On-line, they can yield power that they don’t really have in the real world, such as if they feel smaller than
someone or different in a way they can’t manage. These people sometimes tell others about what they have done in an effort to gain some
kind of power status.
3. Entertainment.  Sadly, some people find bullying others entertaining. They think embarrassing others is funny.  Usually these people
Cyber-bully in groups, such as at a slumber party, or on a sports team outing.  Having an audience is part of what makes this type of
Cyber-bully fun.
----------------------------------------------
Does this definition apply to anyone you are having problems with? Want to call them out?
Let the internet know who these people are so they are no longer able to hide.

There are numerous problems with Disqus.com that never seem to be resolved. Making complaints on channels are deleted more often than not or they are so censored they are ineffective. Emailing Disqus just results in a canned response to placate you without any real effort to address the problems.
The last few months there have been some channel creators and mods who openly attack anyone that disagrees with them. This would be fine as it is the nature of the beast for comment platforms. However this group follows community members around to harass them wherever they comment. Disqus is well aware of this group and allows them to continue simple because the employees in charge of dealing with such harassment is friends with them. If you click report user that it sent to these employees and nothing is done about it.
This group goes beyond harassment and are the definition of cyber bullying, yet Disqus ignores wheir behavior.
In an email from Daniel Ha, one of the CEO's of Disqus, I was told that Disqus is a software company and Disqus.com is not a priority because they are not responsible for channel content. That is the same as McDonalds saying each locations a franchise so McD's is not responsible for how that franchise represents their company. If it has your name on it dumb ass it represents your company. The other problem with this non answer is that the problem isn't channel content. It is employees not doing their jobs and allowing  their friends to violate ToS as well as Disqus policy.
Could I leave Discus.com? Yes, of course. However why I am supposed to be forced off of a site I enjoy by a few people who are bragging about intentionally attacking anyone they dislike and getting away with it.
The bottom line is that Disqus needs to recognize Disqus.com represents their brand so the employees allowing these people to create a hostile environment reflects badly on the company.

Disqus is a blog commenting host service for websites and online communities that use a networking platform. Have you accessed Disqus? What has your experience been?