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.