-10

In my answer on question - How does one politely decline a handshake due to religious reasons? - I have an answer that had an entire paragraph chopped out of it.

Not only that but the mods keep deleting my comments in response to other comments BUT KEEP THE ORIGINAL COMMENTS.

Here is the deleted section of my answer:

Addendum: We must talk about the elephant in the room. There is a massive perception in the US and parts of Europe that Muslim men believe that women are inferior. I am not arguing one way or another on this perception. You can say it isn't true but there will be countless people who will believe it to be true and it only takes one of them to get the author fired from his job. People in the comments say it is his religious obligation not to shake hands. Before commenting please please tell me where the line of religious obligation is drawn and where do you think an employer should draw it? Should an employer allow a white person to have a religious obligation not to shake a black person's hands? Just because it is in a religion doesn't make it right.

Addendum II: US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This link says absolutely NOTHING. It says that if he refuses to shake hands and if people feel he is discriminate against women it is sexual harassment. If people feel like it he is "good" then it is fine. This is a document you could give to HR - because it says nothing. But this document will not help keep the author from getting fired. Based on this document anyone could perceive the author's intent is discriminatory and fire him.

I fail to see how these are not directly correlated with the author's question.

Also to go along with this please see this comment by Monica below in my answer

Relevant: i.stack.imgur.com/lMnCX.png – Monica Cellio♦ 3 mins ago

She is telling me to not put comments on my answer that should be in the post. Then deletes those exact things once I put them in the post.

To clarify this question: I do not have an issue with the mods deleting comments. I understand that comments get overwhelming on some questions/answers and need to be deleted. I do have an issue with a mod deleting a comment and then using it as an answer. I do have an issue with the mods picking and choosing which comments to delete. I do have an issue with the mods treating answers from other mods differently than non-mods.

Also I was never given a reason why the sections above were deleted. They were in direct context to the question and other answers. I feel that if the mods are going to make a widespread delete there should be an OBVIOUS reason or they should work with the author on wording. The mods then took this one step further and LOCKED IT DOWN. If you have an upvote on Monica's answer below you did not understand all of the facts. Also I asked Monica to help get comments to prove my issues and she has only went back and retrieved one to help her side.

  • 9
    see What is the etiquette for modifying posts? and The Great Edit Wars " if you aren’t comfortable with the community editing your posts, Stack Overflow may not be the right website for you..." – gnat May 15 '15 at 17:34
  • 2
    @gnat - I am sorry that I don't have more rep to go back and grab the comments and stuff to make a better question. This is not about that yet. I feel that it is more about mod to mod interaction on this site being different than mod to user. – blankip May 15 '15 at 17:42
  • 5
    @gnat From the "The Great Edit Wars" link: "if the author of the post is resistant to your editing changes, even a perfectly legitimate edit based on the above rules, be the bigger man (or woman) and let them have it their way." Blankip is asking for exactly that, while the moderators keep editing. – Sjoerd May 15 '15 at 19:08
  • @Sjoerd I knew this will come up. Note it's #4 in the list, which opens with as fairly strong statement: "I don’t like to see people go, but sometimes it’s just not a good fit". Per my reading, this means, author's resistance is to be respected only within context defined in prior points – gnat May 15 '15 at 19:16
  • 4
    ...upon closer look, respect-author part of the article appears to be focused on explaining how Stack Exchange editing differs from that on Wikipedia. Over here, it is definitely not okay to add something that wasn't intended by post author, and this is completely different from Wikipedia where articles are anonymous by desigh. With this in mind, worth noting that edit we discuss did not add anything to the post (it only removed part of it) – gnat May 15 '15 at 22:24
  • 6
    @gnat shame on you for trying to run off this user. Removing content like that changes the meaning of the remaining content. We excise content that is superfluous. Not content that is about the subject matter at hand. Even entirely redundant content removal is questionable. I think the content was removed because the mod removing it disagreed with it. Mods are called on to be judicious. This was overstepping. – Aaron Hall May 17 '15 at 1:56
  • 3
    my point is, there's no easy way out here. You won't find an authoritative reference that discourages edits similar to one we discuss here. To be blunt, an answer to general, non-specific part of this question ("What right do mods have...") is, not only moderators, every 2K user has a fundamental right to edit posts as they see fit. Specific edits of course can be wrong, that's why there is even a dedicated feature to deal with these (rollback). But to explain that particular edit is wrong indeed, one needs more than vague slogans about author rights and content removal – gnat May 20 '15 at 8:57
  • 1
    Wow, excellent question, excellent answer about religion vs law, but for some reason so highly downvoted. Feel sorry for you. – Salvador Dali Sep 19 '15 at 8:36
30

Ok, first off, it's clear that you feel strongly, but your post makes it seem like you may be letting perceived offenses get the better of you. If you want folks to give you the benefit of the doubt in this situation, you'll do far better by waiting until you can make a calm, rational argument for why things should've been handled differently... Right now, you're coming off as someone who is upset that they weren't allowed to freely rant about something that bothered them, and taking every opportunity to lash out at the people who restrained him - a poor way of handling yourself, here or anywhere else.

Take a walk. Drink a cup of tea. Come back when you've had time to think through this a bit - trust me, it will help.


Now, to address the rest of your concerns...

What right do moderators have to edit or remove what you've written?

They have the right granted to them by the system and by the folks here who elected them to do exactly that. Indeed, they have not just the right to do so, but the responsibility to do so - they are charged by the community here to maintain a civil forum conducive to the creation of useful answers. Upon being made aware of a post or comment that threatens this order, they must edit or remove it - anything else would be to abdicate the responsibility they were given, to betray those who trusted them.

Now, you can argue that the specific edit wasn't necessary, and if you believe that then perhaps you should lay out your rationale for why the text that was removed was helpful in answering the asker's question (or at very least, not detrimental to this end). But the argument that moderators shouldn't undertake such work is utterly invalid; such work is the very reason why moderators exist, and indeed why all privileged members of the community are trusted with the right to edit, to improve on the work of others such that future readers may learn from it.

If you don't understand why a particular edit was made, why certain comments were removed, why warnings were left or have any other question about moderation here, you're more than free to ask. If you disagree with the rationale, you can bring the matter before the community here. Be honest; be willing to learn. And be willing to accept the decision of the community here, in cases where they disagree with you and side with the moderators they elected.

Most of all, try not to lose sight of the bigger picture: the situation on that question, and on your answer in particular, was quickly degenerating into an inflammatory discussion that did nothing to address the asker's question. Moderators took considerable effort to correct this, while facing a considerable lack of cooperation from some of the people involved. Debating the consistency of specific actions taken is naive; this is a live question and the moderation is ongoing, with actions taken as time and circumstances permit. If you see a problem that hasn't yet been addressed, the most productive thing you can do is to flag it and thus ensure that the moderator team is aware of it.

Reposting a comment as an answer

You brought this up in your answer here; I think you're confused as to what actually happened.

I stopped by briefly yesterday in response to something else, and happened upon a flag in the comments under the question here. Seeing that the comments were largely irrelevant and somewhat inflammatory, I summarily deleted all of them. One of them, which I assume is the one you're referencing, read as follows:

I'm with @Bregalad - Give her a big hug and tell her that you can't shake hands because of your religious beliefs. Haha, but in all seriousness, you can decline but there's not a "polite" way to do it in the US. The constitution that the country was founded on states that all citizens are equal(give or take, this isn't a history lesson) I would suggest if you're going to make that distinction don't shake anyone's hand. People will be more willing to accept that you can't shake anyone's hand as opposed to only women, but even so, that's a slippery slope. – zfrisch

This... Vaguely resembles enderland's initial answer:

An easy way to do this is to not shake hands with anyone.

This avoids the problems related to sexism entirely. You can say something, "I prefer not to shake hands due to my religion" if someone tries to shake your hand.

...insofar as both recommend not shaking hands with anyone. Of course, several other people make the same recommendation in various forms across the other answers and comments; it would appear to be a rather obvious solution to the problem. Given enderland neither borrowed any of the wording nor was involved in the removal of that comment, I don't see any indication of impropriety there.

  • 6
    Thank you for your answer. Your answer is purely reflective of the mods abusing this site. You are telling me to calm down while I am presenting rational points and you are calling me a "fool". Also the mods are telling me my post weren't "nice" (and deleting) but I don't see anyone editing your answer saying that I am acting like a fool. The only thing foolish here is the logic. Seriously - and I am actually having a great day. See people can present arguments while being in a great mood - sorry you are taking it differently. – blankip May 15 '15 at 20:38
  • 3
    Also you have listed exactly zero examples of how my answer was not relevant to the question. Zero. I believe that I have a very good track record of answering questions. And I don't see anything wrong with what I wrote on this one. Please give specific examples of what wasn't relative and why. You are the calm/rational one so this should be easy for you. Also you did not answer why my comments were deleted and the others stayed and then my comments were deleted under Enderland's. – blankip May 15 '15 at 20:51
  • 4
    @blankip, fair first point. I agree with Shog's post, but a couple of lines were less nice than we aim for, so I did edit them. – Jaydles May 15 '15 at 21:14
  • 11
    See, this is the sort of behavior that's really hurting your cause here, @blankip - if you can look at the two blocks I quoted and see evidence of plagiarism, then you need to look in a mirror (or rather, your own answer). Then you need to read the rest of the answers and comments on the question in question. These accusations and continued insistence on accusation instead of taking the time to take stock of the situation and build a coherent argument have cost you any credibility you might've had with me in this discussion; I've answered your questions - take it or leave it. – Shog9 May 15 '15 at 21:20
  • 7
    I just wanna say how much I respect you employees at StackExchange. You're really awesome people who know how to exemplify the kind of behavior you want to see in the community. – jpmc26 May 15 '15 at 22:50
  • 1
    @Shog9 - do you work on the enterprise solution too and does your bosses accept this kind of behavior? Just wondering because our company has been talking to your sales dept about trialing enterprise. Just asking because you might want to ask on the workplace SE if you should be telling a potential client that he is a fool. I will be contacting our sales rep. – blankip May 16 '15 at 4:11
  • 6
    @blankip Shog was trying to help you realize just how unwise your behavior is, in hopes of helping you see that you should change said behavior. Resorting to threatening a business deal over your voluntary participation in this community (which has nothing to do with whether a privately run StackExchange will be valuable to your company) is really just more of the same behavior. – jpmc26 May 16 '15 at 15:08
  • 4
    @blankip Jay made some edits while agreeing with your point. That is Shog9's boss, I just want to be certain that you read his comment, as such things tend to slip by when notifications are plentiful :) There was some frustration that wasn't articulated as thoughtfully as it could have been, that has been remedied. I understand if you're still a bit sour about everything, but please do account for it being remedied. – Tim Post May 16 '15 at 16:05
  • 1
    @TimPost - Listen I believe that your mods on this site were abusing their privileges. That is way beyond the point. I have been an active member of SE for years and just did an enterprise presentation of SE to our advisory board last month. The issue is this - when a user has an issue with a mod/fellow employee the mod then has an answer that belittles the user and doesn't even come close to ATTEMPTING to answer the question. THEN all his mod buddies come by and upvote his answer (which answers nothing) - cont. – blankip May 16 '15 at 16:40
  • 4
    @blankip Would you mind reaching out to me at tpost@stackoverflow.com? Cramming this into comments probably won't work so well. I'd like to talk. – Tim Post May 16 '15 at 17:04
  • 4
    I wonder if you know the difference between moderation and censorship. Moderators are not elected to delete content that they personally don't agree with. Don't agree with something in the answer? Downvote it and post a comment explaining what you think is wrong and why, and let OP have an opportunity to improve the post. OP has raised very valid points in his "deleted" answer. It might make the majority feel uncomfortable, but that doesn't automatically make it wrong. You are falling victim to the fallacy of Groupthink (look it up!). – Masked Man May 18 '15 at 16:20
  • 7
    Yeah... We're not here to host an open debate forum, @masked. Folks on this site tend to forget sometimes, but the purpose of this place - the only purpose - is to ask and answer questions about the workplace. If you'd rather do something else, then... Well, lots of other forums on this big ol' Internet. – Shog9 May 18 '15 at 17:03
  • 1
    @MaskedMan you might be interested in this post - meta.workplace.stackexchange.com/a/3169/2322 - it provides more insight into why that answer had the actions taken that were taken. – enderland May 19 '15 at 2:00
  • 2
    @Shog9 If that is so, why not get rid of the comments feature entirely? If you don't agree with an answer, just edit it to suit your liking. That's what the site is about, isn't it? – Masked Man May 19 '15 at 9:28
  • 2
    @enderland I have no complaints about mods deleting the comments. I am only concerned about mods deleting several paragraphs from an answer. No matter what the provocation, edits should not change the answer drastically. Find the tone of the answer too offensive? Then fix that, don't just get rid of the whole thing. That aside, there is nothing offensive in the portions that were deleted. Do you see any abusive language used there? He has raised a difficult question (as he even points out calling it "elephant in the room"), but that doesn't make it offensive by itself. – Masked Man May 19 '15 at 15:31
14

As I explained in the edit summary, your latest edit just added your strongly-held personal opinions about religion. This is not a constructive change; rather, it degrades the quality of the site. The OP asked a sincere question reflecting a problem that lots of people in the world actually have. Your participation on this question has largely amounted to "that's not a real problem because religion is stupid". That is not acceptable. Your edit wasn't appropriate the first time you made it and it wasn't appropriate the second time, when you rolled back my removal of it. (That is why your answer is now locked.)

As for comments, so far there are approximately 160 deleted comments on the question and its answers. Most of those comments are arguments about religion, discrimination, bigotry, and other participants. None of that has anything to do with answering the OP's question. We will continue to delete stuff like that.

Let's look at the two comments that remain on your answer after the "comments removed" notice:

"You may feel that it is your religious right to not shake a woman's hand". As I read it, OP states that it is his religious obligation - not "right" - not to touch women other than his wife or close family members. – Mawg 7 hours ago

This is a correction of an assertion in your answer.

There is no such thing as a "business environments that requires you to shake hands". – David Richerby 6 hours ago

This is a valid criticism of your answer.

In both cases, you can address the issue by editing the answer appropriately and then flagging the comments as obsolete. Arguing with a comment in another comment is not the way to go here.

Also, there is this:

warning about comments

This question and everything attached to it has generated 32 flags so far. That is way out of line for this site. We strive to take the smallest action that addresses a problem. The question and many of the answers are valuable and it's not fair to the other participants to let this kind of stuff get out of hand.

Addendum

I was asked in a comment:

@MonicaCellio I am really confused by your summary of blankip's addendum. It basically said "Unfortunately I would be remiss not to mention the fact that there is a negative stereotype in the US against Muslims which is blah. Be aware that doing blah may lead people to believe blah about you." S/he wasn't promoting or approving the stereotype, just presenting it as a sad fact of life. There are other parts of the answer that sound distinctly dodgier to me, so I'm not sure why you singled out that part. Can you be more specific about how you feel that the addedum violated site policy? – starsplusplus

It's the stuff that came next. This is what I removed in my first rollback:

Addendum: I think we need to talk about the elephant in the room. There is a massive perception that Muslim men feel that women are inferior. I don't want to get into this argument. You can say that this isn't true, but I can find countless others that will counter that - and if one of them has a problem with the author, he could be fired. So this begs the question - as a society that was brought together for equality where do we draw the line? I have had people comment that Muslims should be able to express their religion. Please please please tell me where the line will be drawn. Can a white person not shake a black person's hand because of religion? Is that OK? I personally think most of the comments on this question are useless unless the commenter can speak as to where that line gets drawn. Just because something is part of a religion doesn't make it right.

"I don't want to get into this argument" -- then why proceed to do so? That's not a "be nice" violation yet, just a signal.

"I personally think most of the comments..." -- not constructive; also not "not nice", just pointless. This is not a discussion forum.

The part in bold -- big problem. Judging the OP's religious motivations is problematic enough; playing the racism card is over the line. The "where do we draw the line?" theme is soap-boxing, not an answer. The only part of that paragraph that contributes to an answer to the question is advice about taking prejudice against one's religion into account when deciding what to do.

When the author reverted my edit I didn't happen to notice the minor variations he made in this paragraph, but they wouldn't have changed my analysis. I did notice the second added paragraph, and had the author given any signal at all that he wanted to work with us to address the problems in this answer instead of just arguing about it, I would have edited to keep some of that and to try to help/teach him. By then, though, the author had already complained here on meta about edits, so I didn't see any benefit in my putting in that extra work to improve his answer.

There have been complaints from the author that I edited this post because I don't like it. That is false. There are lots of posts on this site I don't like; I downvote them. (I downvoted this one.) People are allowed to be wrong on the Internet. But on this particular corner of the Internet, they are not allowed to be rude, to incite conflict, or to conduct irrelevant arguments, and I will edit for that (or delete if that's all it is). That we provide a textbox does not give anybody the right to fill it with stuff that doesn't belong, whether questions, answers, or comments.

The author has two choices as far as I'm concerned: (1) accept that this content is not permitted and we can unlock (feel free to edit further constructively), or (2) delete the answer.

Arguably this answer skirts the "not an answer" line in its current form, and if we unlock you might want to do something about that. Otherwise it's possible the community will.

  • 2
    The comments are just the tip. It is my answer being edited that I find outrageous. I will work on the wording on things but I feel that you edited the "best" part of the answer out of it. It would be nice for you to show the edited section and not two comments. – blankip May 15 '15 at 17:27
  • 10
    If you're not comfortable with other people editing your posts, this may not be the right place for you. You agreed to that in the terms of use. And if that were actually the best part of your answer it would have already been deleted as not an answer. The revision history is public: everybody is welcome to inspect the history. – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 17:50
  • 1
    You deleted a whole section not edited it. It was a boom/swipe/delete job. How about I start doing that to parts of your answers I don't like? – blankip May 15 '15 at 17:53
  • 7
    You've been pointed to information about edits; I suggest you read it. Edits that comply with site policies are welcome on anybody's posts, including mine. Editing because you don't like a post isn't. And that's not what I did in your case. If you can't see that, there is nothing else I can do to explain it to you. It's time for you to calm down, read the documentation, and start participating productively. (And at your reputation level I assume you know by now how to look at revision histories.) – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:00
  • 2
    I am completely calm about this. I just think that people are being treated differently here. And I think it needs to be addressed. It seems that you want to ignore that. That is fine and I will take it to the Meta site. – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:06
  • 2
    So are you saying that if I don't have an answer I can comment on someone's answer but if I do have an answer then I have to take comments about issues with their answer and stick them in mine? I have never heard of this. Can you refer me to this documentation on SE? – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:36
  • 1
    This is the kind of editing wars that made Wikipedia untrustworthy. In case of editing conflicts, the one originally posting the answer should have the final say. – Sjoerd May 15 '15 at 18:37
  • 5
    @blankip see the Help Center page on comments. In particular, see "When should I comment?" and "When shouldn't I comment?". Comments that are in line with those policies stick around; comments that are not in line with them are deleted when we become aware of them. Just because you have something to say doesn't mean that we have to provide a platform for you to say it on. – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:38
  • 2
    @MonicaCellio - That page in no way answers the question I asked stemming from your assertion that I am not allowed to comment on another answer based on me having an answer. – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:42
  • 4
    @blankip I don't see how you could possibly get what you suggested from anything I've said or done, nor how you could think that your interpretation is reasonable if you'd read the documentation people have provided you. – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:51
  • 2
    @MonicaCellio - what did you last comment mean? Can you please be specific? You keep referring to guidelines. I am asking for the specific guideline you are referring to. Thanks. – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:58
  • 4
    @MichaelFredrickson it has nothing to do with my personal opinions (and for the record I don't follow religious laws about touching). Assuming that working around a social convention is somehow workplace discrimination is a pretty big leap, don't you think? – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 19:15
  • 3
    @MichaelFredrickson - Thank you for the comment. See we have gotten to the bottom the issue on this question. Monica doesn't agree with my answer so she deletes part of it. She then keeps comments that disagree with my answer there while wiping away similar comments from other answers that she does agree with. I find this to be appalling mod behavior. It is not the right of a mod to delete things they don't agree with and lock an answer. – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:18
  • 3
    @MonicaCellio - based on your comment then you should go downvote my answer (which I am sure you have done). Please refer to the Help Center page on what you should do if you disagree with an answer. However this does not give you the right to play with the entire question and delete things you don't agree with. Please go downvote my answer and then leave it alone. – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:20
  • 4
    @MonicaCellio I am really confused by your summary of blankip's addendum. It basically said "Unfortunately I would be remiss not to mention the fact that there is a negative stereotype in the US against Muslims which is blah. Be aware that doing blah may lead people to believe blah about you." S/he wasn't promoting or approving the stereotype, just presenting it as a sad fact of life. There are other parts of the answer that sound distinctly dodgier to me, so I'm not sure why you singled out that part. Can you be more specific about how you feel that the addedum violated site policy? – starsplusplus May 16 '15 at 20:02
10

In response to your question

Not only that but the mods keep deleting my comments in response to other comments BUT KEEP THE ORIGINAL COMMENTS.

Your answer has 62 deleted comments, 14 of which were added by you. The overwhelming majority of discussion on your answer was deleted by moderators (not myself, either).

Implying that the moderators are deleting your comments but leaving all the original comments is disingenuous at best, when of the 96% of the comments from others on your post were deleted.

I have an answer that had an entire paragraph chopped out of it

If you look through the revision history on your post, you will find that the part Monica removed initially is not what you have quoted here.

The removed paragraph effectively says, "your religion not wanting you to shake hands with women is basically the same as racism so you should get fired. And your religion is wrong."

Feel free to read Stack Exchange be nice policy, specifically:

  • Name-calling. Focus on the post, not the person. That includes terms that feel personal even when they're applied to posts (like "lazy", "ignorant", or "whiny").

  • Bigotry of any kind. Language likely to offend or alienate individuals or groups based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc. will not be tolerated. At all. (Those are just a few examples; when in doubt, just don't.)

Content like that paragraph is not appropriate on Stack Exchange.


Addressing your concerns here

#1 Enderland's original answer comes directly from a comment that was deleted by the mods. I know that some people turn comments into answers. I know it happens everywhere. But I find it a gross misuse of power that I can delete something on a site and reuse it as mine.

I double checked all deleted comments posted before my answer on the question, your answer, and HGLEM's answer - no comment addressed the content of my answer (shake hands with neither gender) prior to me posting it.

As a result, I am unsure what you mean by this, can you please clarify?

The only even tangentially related comment posted when I posted was from you on your answer about 60 seconds before my answer was posted (it was you saying "I just know I treat everyone the same based on their sex/appearance/religion... those things. If my religion asked me to treat someone different I would just skip over that or I would put myself in situations where I didn't need to make these types of decisions").

I stand corrected, an inappropriate comment (which was deleted by a Stack Exchange Community Manager - not a moderator here - a little over 9 minutes before I posted my answer) did have language about that buried in it.

#2 Monica's thought in her answer to my question may be correct. However let's compare them to the comments that I made under Enderland's question a few hours ago about the validity of the link that was provided in their answer. Note that Monica kept comments under my question and deleted things that Enderland should be addressing. It would seem to me as being a simple peasant on the site that there is a hierarchy that is looking out for itself - different rules for different people.

You can find all these discussion points in this chat room which is linked on my answer.

Please take some time to read through what comments are. The sections "When should I comment?" and "When shouldn't I comment?" specifically.

  • That is not true. I was posting mine while comments were made that said things like don't shake hands with anyone and that is exactly what your original answer said. You have now edited it many times. So it is different but many of your original upvotes came directly from a comment that was deleted by a mod. This comment was still present (maybe I needed to refresh page) while I saw your answer pop up. – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:56
  • Also the exact thing that is in my question was deleted. This was my second attempt at wording it so that it directly answered the question. It was deleted. Please don't confuse people. This was deleted. I had a very very similar revision that was deleted, I tried to make it even more relevant (it was already) and then it was deleted. – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:03
  • 3
    @blankip after further investigation, it seems you are correct - a Community Manager had purged comments about 9 minutes before I posted my [very short at that point] answer. One of those comments did contain what you are describing (after quite not constructive content). I apologize for not noticing this when I double and triple checked the deleted comments and timestamps.. – enderland May 15 '15 at 19:19
  • I am not accusing you of stealing an answer. I don't know nor do I care what you were looking. Your answer did come at the exact same time of comment though. You have to imagine how dubious this all looks when paired with so much biased mod behavior on a question. I have never had issues with mods on the site before and it is sad that some sort of religious/political/legal question strikes people to act differently. – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:25
  • 2
    @blankip the comment I am referring to on the question was added at 8:15pm server time, was deleted at 8:31, and my answer came at 8:41 (rounding to nearest minute). – enderland May 15 '15 at 19:31
  • Yes I know. I was editing my answer at the time. If it was deleted at 8:31 and you hit the submit button at 8:41 it was most assuredly on your screen while you were writing your answer. – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:34
8

I'm posting this separately to avoid mingling my explanation with the raw data.

Revision history of blankip's answer


All comments on the question:

part 1

part 2

part 3

part 4


All comments on HLGEM's answer:

part 1

part 2


All comments on enderland's answer:

part 1

part 2


All comments on user568458's answer:

all


All comments on blankip's answer:

part 1

part 2

part 3

part 4

part 5


All comments on Adel's answer:

all


No comments on Zibbobz's answer have been deleted.


No comments on Sjoerd's answer have been deleted.

  • 10
    Wow, that's like YouTube, without the videos. You might just be on to something there; you should explore this idea more. – Tim Post May 17 '15 at 15:08
  • 4
    Thank you for taking the time to do this. In my opinion, just the sheer volume of comments is reason enough to nuke them all. – fredsbend May 17 '15 at 23:11
  • 1
    @fredsbend you're welcome. I had not realized (I guess because it was already deleted by the first time I saw comments) that the very first comment the OP received set the tone for a lot of the problems that followed. – Monica Cellio May 17 '15 at 23:48
  • 1
    Note that not all comments on blankip's answer have been removed, e.g. comment 117012 by Mawg. Note that blankip's reply to that comment has been removed, both from the comments and his answer. I consider this not fair. – Sjoerd May 18 '15 at 0:06
  • 4
    @Sjoerd on further consideration, I am removing those comments. While there was a chance that blankip would address the issues raised in an appropriate edit to his answer it made sense to keep them for reference, but it's not so clear that will happen now. Mawg can always post an answer when the question is unlocked. – Monica Cellio May 18 '15 at 0:56
-2

In case of editing conflicts, the one originally posting the answer should have the final say. Their name is connected to the answer.

We don't want the kind of editing wars that made Wikipedia untrustworthy. In case of a conflict, both sides make their point, and the person whose name is connected to the answer has the final say.

  • 3
    When the "final say" does not follow site guidelines, do you then agree that the post in question should be deleted -- that deleting inappropriate content is better if the author insists on his version? – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:48
  • @MonicaCellio Whether or not the answer follows side guidelines (which, BTW, are guidelines) is frequently in the eye of the beholder. We shouldn't allow abusing guidelines to enforce one's point of view - let voting take care of that. – Sjoerd May 15 '15 at 18:52
  • 5
    As noted in enderland's answer on this question, the removed content is a clear violation of the "be nice" rule. That's an SE-wide rule. Either stuff like that has to be edited out or the post has to be deleted; given those choices, which do you favor? – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:57
  • 3
    According to your logic, the original post should be deleted - after all, not shaking hands of women is considered "not nice" by a lot of people. – Sjoerd May 15 '15 at 19:01
  • 4
    The question is just fine. It's respectful, describes a workplace-related problem, and asks for solutions. I hope all the people calling the OP a bigot didn't chase him off. – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 19:06
  • 1
    @MonicaCellio - I felt that all of my posts were nice. When you are debating something and you present a counter argument that doesn't mean you are being mean. I was trying to convey an even/neutral stance about how his situation may be perceived. Can you give me an example of when I was not nice? – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:06
  • 3
    @blankip you don't see how comparing Islam and the Muslim original poster to the KKK is offensive or "not nice?" Your answer (and many comments on the posts there) is deliberately drawing the analogy that the OP's actions resulting from his religious beliefs are comparable to the KKK. – enderland May 15 '15 at 19:26
  • 2
    @enderland - Are you serious? I even had a note that I wasn't comparing the two. I was showing an example of how far someone could take freedom of religion. This has already been through US courts. I DELETED THIS POINT MYSELF because I did not want the association in my answer. This was edited out very quickly (BY ME) and almost all of the votes were after this. Even with the KKK - EXAMPLE - it has nothing to do with nice or not nice. It was an example and I mentioned it was the most extreme. What does this even have to do with this question? – blankip May 15 '15 at 19:31
  • 6
    The one point you're missing, @blankip, is that SE isn't a platform for debate/discussion, which is also why mods on this site have been removing comments. While Workplace SE is not a technology topic, this is still a Q&A site, and answers to questions should objectively answer the question and be supported by our back it up policy. Claims you make should be backed with facts, references, or experiences you've had that support your assertions, and most importantly, should answer the question of how to politely decline shaking hands. – jmort253 May 16 '15 at 0:32
-4

Monica defends the use of the mods deleting comments. I am going to post this to the main Meta site but would like it discussed here.

#1 Enderland's original answer comes directly from a comment that was deleted by the mods. I know that some people turn comments into answers. I know it happens everywhere. But I find it a gross misuse of power that I can delete something on a site and reuse it as mine.

#2 Monica's thought in her answer to my question may be correct. However let's compare them to the comments that I made under Enderland's question a few hours ago about the validity of the link that was provided in their answer. Note that Monica kept comments under my question and deleted things that Enderland should be addressing. It would seem to me as being a simple peasant on the site that there is a hierarchy that is looking out for itself - different rules for different people.

  • 5
    All of the comments then existing on enderland's answer were moved to chat. A link saying to take it to chat was posted there. Are you saying that you continued to post comments instead of taking it to chat as requested? And you're surprised that got deleted? – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 17:54
  • @MonicaCellio - See now you are using some circular logic and HR type of mind games. My question ALSO said things were moved to chat yet you kept the comments of some and not others there. Also being a mod can you help me edit my question? I would like you to find the original comments that correlate directly to Enderland's original answer. I would also like my comments to Enderland's question so that people can see the similarities. – blankip May 15 '15 at 17:58
  • 1
    Relevant: i.stack.imgur.com/lMnCX.png – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:28
  • @MonicaCellio - I find it really odd that I asked for your help to find data for my question/this answer and you have a screenshot of you telling me to put information in my answer not comments, and then you delete those sections of my answer. Am I in bizzaro world? – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:31
  • 1
    What you add to an answer still has to be relevant as part of an answer. What I removed was not, which I have already explained. Feel free to escalate your complaint; there's a "contact us" link on every page that goes straight to SE. – Monica Cellio May 15 '15 at 18:35
  • 3
    @MonicaCellio - I am not trying to be rude. I have an argument and you are presenting me with circular logic and you cannot answer why my comments were removed from Enderland's post and yet similar comments remained on mine FOR THE EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCES. And you have never answered how the parts you deleted weren't relevant to my answer. You must think very very highly of your personal opinions. – blankip May 15 '15 at 18:43
  • 1
    @MonicaCellio You're being challenged on comment deletes and such. It would go a long way to snapshot all of them, even if it is a hundred long. Let the facts speak for themselves. – fredsbend May 17 '15 at 6:09
  • 3
    @fredsbend y'know, I think that would be pretty educational. Stand by for a new answer with several screen shots. – Monica Cellio May 17 '15 at 14:35

You must log in to answer this question.

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