14
$\begingroup$

Why was my answer to this meta question deleted by Moderator Alexander Gruber? I believe it has no proper reason to be deleted. Since it was deleted by a moderator, nobody except the moderators can vote to undelete it.

$\endgroup$
  • 15
    $\begingroup$ I agree that the answer shouldn't have been deleted. I voted it down, since I disagreed with it (and expressed so in my comments), but I think that deletion of meta answers should be reserved for answers that are deeply off-topic or are uncivil. (Also, it's not quite true that nobody except the original moderator can undelete it - any of the moderators could.) $\endgroup$ – user61527 May 31 '14 at 23:13
  • 14
    $\begingroup$ By now you must be accustomed to being treated unfairly. The unfortunate thing is that moderators, that one expects (perhaps unreasonably) to behave better than the rest of us, do not necessarily do so. $\endgroup$ – André Nicolas Jun 1 '14 at 0:40
  • 14
    $\begingroup$ I join in asking the moderators to undelete. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jun 1 '14 at 0:59
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I "vote" to undelete the answer (even though I also disagree with the answer itself). $\endgroup$ – Thomas Jun 1 '14 at 1:49
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ I tried to vote that the post be undeleted. Was informed that it could not happen, that a moderator had voted for deletion. I suggest that the moderator agree, or resign. $\endgroup$ – André Nicolas Jun 1 '14 at 2:02
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ This comment thread is awfully inflammatory. Does nobody think of the obvious explanation that the side effect was a surprise? $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl Jun 1 '14 at 5:05
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @user61527 There are two sorts of "binding", which your comment does not distinguish. A moderator's closevotes are binding in the sense that they take effect at once, but they can be reversed by non-moderators voting to reopen. Moderator's deletion votes cannot be reversed by non-moderators. The latter issue does not come up often, so it's possible the moderator did not consider this effect of the vote. $\endgroup$ – user147263 Jun 1 '14 at 6:02
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @MakotoKato It pleases me to see that you stuck up for you response to that post even in the face of negative votes and requisite graying of content. If you had not done so, I would not have been able to read your opinion on the matter. Your opinion appears to go against the prevailing waters in that particular case, but it is honest, polite, and thoughtful. I see no danger in letting it stand as is; thoughtful polite opinions do not scare me personally even when they goes against my own sense of correctness. $\endgroup$ – J. W. Perry Jun 1 '14 at 8:20
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Our friendly neighbourhood Mad Scientist has very recently made the following feature request on Meta SE: Regular users should be able to undelete moderator-deleted posts. $\endgroup$ – user642796 Jun 1 '14 at 11:03
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @Did I do not know about a "childish vendetta" but from observation I consider it as an established fact that OP is target of continued abuse/bullying on this site (and on MO, to a lesser extent). Ineed, I do not consider this as childish at all anymore but meanwhile as quite severe. $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 1 '14 at 16:05
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila Yet I don't see any rationale for saying that this answer shouldn't be on meta at all. It contributes something (as do, IMHO, the comments below it), and helps document the community's opinions on the issue being discussed. I think that deleting unpopular but on-topic and meaningful answers is disruptive and harmful. $\endgroup$ – user61527 Jun 1 '14 at 17:41
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ @BillDubuque This thread is not about how much the moderators here suck, illustrated by mentioning unrelated issues. I'm under the expression though that you think every meta thread is on that very topic. If you want, you can make up a new thread and I will repost the comments there in their entirety. $\endgroup$ – Michael Greinecker Jun 1 '14 at 19:58
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ The "bullying" against Makoto is, IMO, due to a lack of moderation. On other sites, the "bullying" behavior would have been an outright ban, and the whole thing would be over and done with. But here, without ♦ moderator action to put an end to things (or conversely, leadership blessing the disputed actions), we're left with the community exercising its moderator powers in the only way it can: downvoting, closing, and deleting the things that it feels are inappropriate. $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl Jun 1 '14 at 21:07
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ @MakotoKato I'm not going to get into yet another discussion about which of your posts have been in violation of community norms - every time I've had this discussion in the past, it's not been at all productive. I will simply mention that the list of questions provided in the moderator notification of your recent suspension is a pretty good start. $\endgroup$ – user61527 Jun 2 '14 at 3:53
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ @MakotoKato I have had literally dozens of discussions with you on meta regarding exactly what aspects of your questions (both on main and meta) I find objectionable. The fact that you continue (as in most other threads) to question me, asking for a specific list of what I object to after I have clearly told you multiple tells me that you're not at all interested in hearing what I have to say, and that my time has been completely wasted. I refuse to continue having this discussion with someone who I believe is participating in bad faith. $\endgroup$ – user61527 Jun 2 '14 at 15:47
12
$\begingroup$

I deleted your answer in response to a flag asserting that it was made in bad faith, to draw attention to a year-old argument and stir up trouble. I agreed with that, so I voted to delete, anticipating that there would otherwise be a delete-undelete war that would be disruptive to the community. (Which, now that my vote has been lifted, there is.) This is precisely the reason that moderator delete votes are binding.

To those crying out that this was an "abuse of my power," I do not apologize for casting a third delete vote to resolve a flag that I agreed with. This has nothing to do with Makoto specifically. Many similar, heavily downvoted answers to old, controversial questions have been deleted in the past. As a matter of fact, Makoto, I have been a voice in your favor many times. I have no vendetta against you. But, you will not make me afraid to do my job. I have spent many, many hours of my life improving this forum, and I do not take kindly to attempts to disrupt it simply for the sake of doing so.

Lastly, let me briefly respond to André Nicolas. I will not resign. I think it's fine that Makoto posted this question, as the decision was perhaps in a grey area, and I have no problem with the answer being undeleted, as that appears to be what the community wants. But your suggestion, which you admit was aimed to wound me, is something I have taken personally. I am a kind person, and in my year of moderation, my contributions have made this community a happier, more peaceful place. I will not be depersonalized. Show some respect, sir.

$\endgroup$
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ I cannot make any sense of what you wrote in the first paragraph. I see nothing at all "in bad faith" in MK's answer. Nor do I see anything there that "draws attention to a year old argument". It is the job of a moderator to impartially assess the merits of a (possibly unfounded) flag. If you are not able to do that, then please let someone else handle the flag. And the only reason that this matter is "disruptive to the community" is due to the highly unusual deletion of such an answer - which goes strongly against community norms. $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque Jun 1 '14 at 23:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you for the explanation that I upvoted, which seems reasonable to a certain extent. However, it was in my opinion rather clear that there is also a risk, and rather a higher one, of causing disruption when deleting it. And while there is a risk in such discussion resurfacing, I do not see that risk being still that high anymore some five days after the answer was given. So, I do not think it was a good decision. But good faith errors in judgement can happen. I will also assume good faith on the side of the flagger, hoping they might do so the next time as well. $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 1 '14 at 23:37
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ @BillDubuque The question is a year old about the most controversial topic on meta, and my impartial judgement was that the flag was correct. I don't know what bias you think I have. $\endgroup$ – Alexander Gruber Jun 1 '14 at 23:38
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @quid Thanks. And yes, I acknowledge that the post timing may have been an error on my part. I didn't notice at the time that the answer was a few days old. $\endgroup$ – Alexander Gruber Jun 1 '14 at 23:40
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Alex The question, though dated, is still highly topical. One might even argue that the success of the site depends crucially on a correct resolution. As such, the more opinions that the community sees on these matters, the more hope there is that we can all understand the motivations behind the various positions, and the more hope we have of reaching an intelligent, reasoned compromise (one that hopefully stops the exodus of teachers). This cannot possibly occur if unpopular answers are deleted. Please help keep meta a place where everyone can share there thoughts, even those in minority $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque Jun 1 '14 at 23:52
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexanderGruber My answer was undeleted now. Did you do it? $\endgroup$ – Makoto Kato Jun 2 '14 at 7:14
  • $\begingroup$ @MakotoKato No, I wasn't around for most of the day. mixedmath undeleted your answer once he saw an appreciable number of people supporting your request (and I support his decision). $\endgroup$ – Alexander Gruber Jun 2 '14 at 7:19
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexanderGruber [(and I support his decision)] You thought my answer was made in bad faith and deserved deletion. Have you changed your mind? $\endgroup$ – Makoto Kato Jun 2 '14 at 7:41
  • $\begingroup$ @Bill If Makoto had wanted to bring the topic up again, surely the standard procedure would be to open a new meta thread? I cite Asaf's answer to a question of Makoto's. $\endgroup$ – user1729 Jun 2 '14 at 8:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user1729PhD: Don't bother citing me. It's like talking about evolution and natural selection with a hardcore creationist. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jun 2 '14 at 8:43
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @user1729PhD: Let yourself go once in a Ph.D., take a day off and read old meta "meat grinder topics". It can be fun, in a sadomasochistic kind of way. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jun 2 '14 at 8:51
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @user1729PhD a quick look at your link (I did not study everything in detail) leads me to the conclusion opposite to the one you claim. The point there was that Makoto Kato create or wanted to create new questions similar to old ones (there is nothing about answers directly). He was told (in various ways) not to do this in general but only exceptional circumstances. One could get the impression that proper etiquette is indeed to use the old question, and only exceptionally create a new one. Possibly Asaf meant this also to apply to answers to old threads but this is not clear at all $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 2 '14 at 9:30
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ and him just saying now it was meant like this would not change the fact that it is generally not clear and thus might have been not clear neither for OP nor for all the people voting. Such strict standards for expressing an opinion on an old topic seem overly extreme, for something with a constant influx of new users and evolving opinions. Anyway to reiterate the key point: your link does IMO not at all support that OP should have known better than to create an answer there, by contrast in view of this thread I would be very heistant to create a new one but rather answer in the old thread. $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 2 '14 at 9:34
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @user1729PhD There is no "standard procedure" of opening new a meta thread vs. posting an answer in old meta threads. Good arguments can be made on both sides. It most certainly is not "bad faith" to choose one method vs. another. But it is most certainly bad faith to attempt to use this reason as an excuse for blatant longtime bullying of a user. $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque Jun 2 '14 at 13:20
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @user1729PhD: Called it. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jun 2 '14 at 16:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .