-1

My question New employee has offensive Slack handle due to language barrier

Was met with a rather hostile reaction from a moderator, locking the entire question down so that only they could edit it. And while this moderator was rather rude, I am completely ignoring that and having an issue with the edit made. The edit says the name is a translation but it isn't, if anything it is an abbreviation. Can this be changed?

| |
  • 2
    Did you read the lock notice? That's not why the post was locked. Also, I don't see any rudeness from the moderator in the post history. – Monica Cellio Oct 26 '16 at 16:02
  • 2
    @MonicaCellio who's asking about the lock? I'm not. All I care about is that the edit is inaccurate. – user49741 Oct 26 '16 at 17:27
  • 13
    If you don't care about the lock or the moderator's alleged rudeness, perhaps you shouldn't mention them so prominently in this question. – Keith Thompson Oct 26 '16 at 17:38
  • 2
    I mention them in passing... or does "I am completely ignoring that and having an issue with the edit made." mean nothing? – user49741 Oct 26 '16 at 17:39
  • 13
    Honestly, it doesn't mean much. "I am completely ignoring" this thing that I'm talking about in inflammatory terms. Incidentally, the current version of the question doesn't call it a "translation". Can we assume the issue is now settled? (Never mind, I see you already addressed that last point in your answer.) – Keith Thompson Oct 26 '16 at 17:43
  • 8
    The workplace site suffers from this extremely. It turns me as well as others off from this place. – JonH Oct 26 '16 at 19:52
  • 10
    Are you asking for an edit or are you raising a complaint regarding moderation? As it stands this question is really passive aggressively trying to raise a complaint with moderation, by alluding to an offense and complaining about it, then saying we should ignore it. – user42272 Oct 27 '16 at 5:38
  • 2
    If you were completely ignoring the moderation you would not mention it. Logical inconsistency. I suggest you edit the remark out of the question and flag all related comments as obsolete. (I don't want to do this, it's your post and you may disagree with my edit) – user8036 Oct 31 '16 at 9:56
11

I clarified further with an additional edit.

The post was locked for one hour because:

This post has been locked due to the high amount of off-topic comments generated. For extended discussions, please use chat.

which I did because there were over two dozen comments that continued to be off topic. I encourage you to read through this documentation in the help center around comments. Pretty much all of this section is relevant, so I won't quote them here.

Also, naming and shaming an employee who is a junior to you? You can't possibly not have expected those comments to not get deleted.

| |
  • 4
    I really could care less about the lock, my issue is the edit is inaccurate. Like, seriously out of left field with the lock issue. Nor do I remotely care that the comments were deleted. Perhaps reading my question instead of bullying is a good use of a moderator's power. – user49741 Oct 26 '16 at 17:27
  • 1
    Where was there shaming? Not that it is that important, just I didn't see it. – user49733 Oct 26 '16 at 18:12
  • 3
    The edits made to this question removed pertinent information that changes what responses it could have gotten. I posted my disagreement with the edit there, which I in absolutely ZERO way think is off topic. From your exact link: Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post. Reverting the edits made to that post would have improved the question, for the reasons that I have already detailed, and of course had deleted. – Kik Oct 26 '16 at 20:08
  • 5
    @Kik the problem is the way the OP was doing so was by mocking their colleague and insisting on including their colleague's real name into the post. I'm not really sure how to separate that issue from what you were raising and given that the OP (and others) continued to discuss the real name... :\ if you can edit the question in a way to avoid this, I would love to see an edit ;-) – enderland Oct 26 '16 at 20:13
  • 3
    @enderland I in no way shape or form was insisting on providing their real name. I am incredibly offended at that accusation. I was insisting on providing the handle being used. In fact no one mentioned the real name aside from once, just the handle. If you had even the least bit of context to the question, you'd have seen this. – user49741 Oct 26 '16 at 20:15
  • 7
    @Walle you included your coworkers real name in an edit to the post, which was removed by another user (properly). This was also mocked by another vocal proponent on this meta post, in a now deleted comment. – enderland Oct 26 '16 at 20:17
  • @enderland yes, that is true. No one is arguing that -_- – user49741 Oct 26 '16 at 20:18
8

I've just reviewed the revision history and the 64 (!) deleted comments (the vast majority of them not constructive or worse), and I don't see anything "hostile" or "rather rude" from moderators. Actually, given the attitudes expressed in some of the comments, including publishing the coworker's real name, I think enderland showed great restraint.

Locks are a standard Stack Exchange feature, used rarely but designed to interrupt something bad that is in progress. A comment lock is appropriate when comments have developed a severe case of "not what comments are for". Locks usually expire in an hour (as in this case) or a day. The lock notice explains the reason for the lock.

Moderators can edit locked posts. In this case a moderator edited the post to address an issue that was the source of a lot of the non-constructive comments. I don't see how that edit could have violated the intentions of an asker who wanted to solve a problem, but I can see how it might frustrate people who wanted to gawk at the coworker's expense.

You're apparently upset over one word, "translation", and enderland fixed that, within five minutes of your post, to say "slang" instead. Next time, consider just asking for the edit you want instead of jumping to accusations of moderator abuse; it'll be much more constructive and productive.

| |
  • 1
    It's possible to purge sensitive data (like passwords) from a post for mods, I think. Do you think the coworker's real name should be purged that way? – muru Oct 27 '16 at 3:32
  • 1
    @muru I've been considering that (got a flag). I don't want to cause harm to the coworker when it feels like he's being made fun of behind his back. On the other hand, I want the community to be able to audit moderators' actions so y'all can see for yourselves what we did or didn't do, since people sometimes make untrue claims. (Granted you can't audit comment deletions, but comments are second-class citizens. Posts are much more important.) I didn't find the post by Googling for the coworker's name, so for now it seems ok to leave things as they are. When things settle down I might redact. – Monica Cellio Oct 27 '16 at 3:45
  • 1
    We got lucky there, I think. The entry in Google's index seems to be from 13 hours ago, when the post only mentioned the first name and "Pound". – muru Oct 27 '16 at 3:49
  • 8
    @Monica Cellio With all due respect, I beg to submit that your priority is incorrect here. Someone's real name being posted on the internet as a subject of ridicule without permission is a lot bigger problem than a few frustrated people making allegedly false accusations against a moderator. Request the moderators to purge the person's real name from the history urgently and worry about the false accusations later. – Masked Man Oct 27 '16 at 5:36
  • 2
    @MaskedMan that's a good point; I was thinking "not in Google, thus doesn't shame him", but you're right that it being here -- especially with someone agitating against that edit and thus drawing attention to it -- does harm to that person. It takes two mods to redact, but I'll kick it off and when somebody else gets here we should be able to take care of that. – Monica Cellio Oct 27 '16 at 12:52
  • 4
    @Walle if your goal is constructive and useful discussion, comments like that absolutely are not beneficial. – enderland Oct 27 '16 at 14:29
  • If I read revision 4 correctly, the name has been purged (though the first name still appears in other revisions, I suppose that's not too problematic). Thank you, Monica and @enderland! – muru Oct 27 '16 at 14:42
  • @muru Uhm, I still see the coworker's name as well as various variations of the username in the edit history. I am afraid this still has potential to harm the OP (especially since they seem to be in a foreign country/culture). Depending on the employer, the OP too could get fired over it if this question becomes "popular"! – Masked Man Oct 27 '16 at 15:22
  • @MaskedMan very true, however, revision 4 was what contained the full name of the coworker in its entirety (first name + surname together) (other entries "just" have the first name and "pound"). I'm not familiar with the redaction process, perhaps the other revisions need to be redacted separately. – muru Oct 27 '16 at 15:25
2

Best to be philosophical about these things, it's a fairly minor issue (to the rest of us I think). I can't see anything worth making a fuss over in how it was handled.

| |
-8

I see the question was edited again since me posting this question on meta, I am fine with it in its current state. Why the moderators are so aggressive... who knows.

| |
  • 4
    This aggression of the moderators would not be acceptable in a PC workplace. Putting down an OP for providing details that was asked of them is not okay. If they just corrected them, I'd imagine you'd have had no issue? – user49733 Oct 26 '16 at 18:31
  • 9
    Just a guess, but the mods are aggressive because this is an very popular & busy exchange. Hot-topic threads quickly spiral out of control if left unchecked. – user30031 Oct 26 '16 at 19:04
  • 9
    The only aggression I see here is from you. – Lightness Races in Orbit Oct 27 '16 at 12:02
  • 4
    when you dox your employee, the love in here is going to be severely curtailed. – Old_Lamplighter Oct 27 '16 at 16:42
  • @RichardU I only doxed them because I was asked to. – user49741 Oct 28 '16 at 14:34
  • 1
    @Walle seriously. never do that again. You have no idea how much mischief can be caused by anyone doing a screenshot. I saw that person's name and I have an eidetic memory. Not only did you dox him, but you also effectively doxed yourself. All anyone has to do is look up that name, find out where this person is working, do a little bit of social engineering, and they've got you. I don't think you understand how serious this is. – Old_Lamplighter Oct 28 '16 at 14:48

You must log in to answer this question.