2

This question was deleted because it was "rude or abusive": https://workplace.stackexchange.com/posts/164134/revisions

How?

This was a very educational case of a professional meeting a roadblock in his personal development and making up excuses to ignore what was in front of his eyes. It was actually going to be very useful, an asset. How was it rude?

5
  • Does this answer your question? This question seemed fair. What was wrong? – gnat Sep 22 '20 at 7:27
  • 1
    Not really, I still don't understand how that question was part of a "coordinate attack". And even if it was made up, we do know people who complain exactly that way! – Monoandale Sep 22 '20 at 9:04
  • back then, it was discussed in chat and moderator explained their reasons for deletion – gnat Sep 22 '20 at 9:31
  • 4
    @gnat Indeed. But of course most users don't follow that. As a rule we don't tend to announce action taken around troll users on Meta, even when it's on this scale. Reason being that the trolls themselves are much more likely to see it. Instead we give a heads-up in chat which means a lot of regulars are aware and can clarify if needed. Of course, when questions are raised on meta we do explain the context as I've just done below. – Lilienthal♦ Sep 22 '20 at 9:38
  • 1
    Grammar was dodgy, well deserved deletion – Kilisi♦ Sep 25 '20 at 8:37
10

The user behind this post was identified as part of a series of troll users that mainly post on agism-related topics. As with the others this user was suspended and most of their posts removed.

The reason you see rude/abusive or spam flags in these situations is because they will feed the automatic IP ban mechanism that StackExchange uses.

As mentioned in my answer on a similar question:

We prefer to avoid deleting questions in this way as the community suffers for it considering the effort they put into answers and edits so we typically only do this in egregious circumstances and when it is clear that further community effort on the question would be wasted.

Whenever a question is dealing with a fictitious situation that's highly specific it means that answer will likely have limited value to others. In those cases we are especially likely to remove entire posts.

In this case, the added updates to further clarify the fake scenario the post was setting up would lead to further wasted effort in answering which is why this was removed. While several other sockpuppet users were suspended, their questions were mostly left up.

For transparency: I've previously posted about these troll users in Workplace Chat:

Well. So. Uh. @Draken (and FYI rest of chat): after some investigative work I've gone ahead and suspended 8 accounts for sockpuppet violations. I've revoked a number of bounties and deleted some posts. Given that the sheer scale will make this quite noticeable I figured I'd give you a heads-up. Thanks again for bringing this to our attention. (September 8)

This post is part of a recent pattern of troll accounts posting questions and answers that are agism related. This particular post has been removed and the account suspended. As per the earlier message (see starred messages on the right), please flag any posts that seem to be related to agism as this will help us to verify whether they are on the level or not. (September 21)

You must log in to answer this question.

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