Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

Timeline for We'd like your feedback on our new Code of Conduct!

Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0

36 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 3, 2020 at 13:30 history edited CommunityBot
Commonmark migration
Jul 10, 2018 at 16:38 comment added endolith Wikipedia's "civility" policy has a similar effect: Everyone is superficially "polite" to avoid violating the rule, while actually acting like complete jerks, which just ends up making every interaction much more infuriating and stressful than if were allowed to just express our frustration openly. Our species evolved these forms of communication for a reason. Somewhere between "usenet flamewar ragefest" and "gritted-teeth sneering politeness" is a good middle ground of respectfully expressing frustration with someone else's actions.
Jul 9, 2018 at 20:36 comment added Stephan "At some point, we're going to have to shrug and say, "we tried" and just let some folks think we're a bunch of arrogant a$$holes" - statement of the year right here. Safe is relative, Nice is relative, Welcoming is relative. A garage is safe, but not nearly as safe as putting it in space where noone can get to it (caugh Uncle Elon caugh). Everyone just needs to chill out quit getting so offended over every little thing, cause frankly, if this place gets as tedious as twitter, i'm just going to stop helping people.
Jul 7, 2018 at 3:07 comment added Nicol Bolas @Draco18s: Yes, that is annoying. Which is why it's important to try to create these circumstances by not refraining from commenting. If there are large groups of people out there abusing the rude/abusive flag, we need to know about it. And the only way we will know is to post unquestionably acceptable comments, see if they get deleted within a day, then notify the authorities (via a meta post).
Jul 7, 2018 at 3:04 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @NicolBolas It gets hard to find examples when comment deletion isn't notified. The only reason Ken even knows is because he got an @-mention that he was able to click on just before the comments were removed. If he had been asleep or at the store he never would have gotten the reply in his inbox.
Jul 7, 2018 at 2:32 comment added Nicol Bolas @KenWhite: Have you considered that maybe some SE employees aren't even aware of these issues? I personally doubt Shog in particular would approve of reasonable comments being deleted without moderator intervention. But of course, we'll never know, because nobody will actually stand up and prove that these things are happening.
Jul 7, 2018 at 2:30 comment added Nicol Bolas @KenWhite: The problem I have with what you're doing is that you act like there's nobody on your side If you can prove that these failings exist, you can at least convince more users that these problems actually exist. What you're talking about is literally the first I've heard of this sort of thing. Consider how many others exist who have no idea about what comments are being removed. You can either give up and let them win, or you can actually fight. But to fight, you have to actually prove your case, not merely shout "lynch mob, #metoo mentality" and expect to be heard.
Jul 7, 2018 at 1:18 comment added Ken White (continued) The attitude recently is It's irrelevant what the users who have spent years building this site for us think, because a few whiners on Twitter are more important to us. When quoting from the help center draws flags that are upheld, and comments asking for a MCVE draw flags or moderator warnings, it's clear what the direction of SE staff is going forward, and it's also clear that what the experienced, long-term users of the site say are irrelevant to them.
Jul 7, 2018 at 1:14 comment added Ken White @NicolBolas: Because it's SE itself (the company) that empowered those users and continues to do so, up to and including the content of this post itself. It's discouraging any sort of moderation or enforcement of guidelines while encouraging the lynch mob, #metoo mentality that makes any claim of disrespect or bias automatically true whether there is any fact behind it or not. The site has gone the way of guilty because someone said so whether there is evidence or not, and continues to move in that direction. SE will continue that way until their complaining stops, no matter what we say.
Jul 7, 2018 at 0:33 comment added Nicol Bolas @KenWhite: If this truly is so common, why aren't you bringing this up more? If there is some lynch mob running around getting comments deleted, talk about it. Keep making perfectly reasonable comments; if one gets deleted like this again, you'll have a link and can present evidence. Good comments being disappeared is not what should be happening, but what you're doing isn't going to solve that problem.
Jul 7, 2018 at 0:31 comment added Nicol Bolas @LancePollard: No, none of that. "What have you tried" is pointless to ask because it's irrelevant noise. If the question is unclear, ask for clarification; if there is no example of what's wrong, as for one. But things like "Interesting question" or waiting to downvote? No. Downvotes are not for the person; they're for the content. If the content is worthy of a downvote as it currently stands, then do so. Seeing a question that deserves a downvote sucks too.
Jul 7, 2018 at 0:02 comment added Ken White (continued) So the end result: I've drastically reduced the comments I leave trying to help or teach new users, and I almost always run out of close votes and question/answer votes daily because I use them instead of commenting. It's safer for me - I don't risk suspension for being helpful. Say what you want - that blog post (and the posts that have followed) have changed policies here, whether they're official or not. A moderator told me in a private comment "If it's any consolation, I've had to stop leaving many comments I've used before also."
Jul 6, 2018 at 23:58 comment added Ken White @NicolBolas: If I had a link, I'd ask a mod to take a look. I don't. What I got was a comment from a ~300 rep user linking me to the Be Nice blog post, which had two upvotes. Before I could respond, my comment was deleted. Within seconds, so was the user's comment. Net result: A low-rep, inexperienced user used a non-applicable reference to that blog post and got a comment from a very experienced user that simply cited the help center content deleted via the gang mentality created by that blog post. If you can't see then connection, then you've already swallowed too much of the Kool-Aid.
Jul 6, 2018 at 6:45 comment added Lance Pollard "what have you tried?" is too blunt. Be gentle. Be welcoming. Show you care about them as a person in writing. Take that extra step. "Interesting question, wondering if you have tried anything in particular to figure this out, that might help us." Then give it a while before you down vote. Maybe there is a "downvote queue" button that could be there where you can come back to the post after a few days and see if you should still down vote it. A down vote right after you ask a question sucks, especially with minimal / no explanation.
Jul 6, 2018 at 0:41 comment added Nicol Bolas @KenWhite: "the new policies have no intellect or judgement behind the enforcement" There are no new policies as of yet. And if comments are being inappropriately deleted, then calling attention to that is really important. If no moderator was involved in the comment's deletion, then you need to stand up and say something about it. Because holes in the system don't get fixed until someone stands up and says that they exist, producing genuine evidence of the problems. Or I suppose you can just blame "the new lynch mob". It won't actually help, but I suppose it makes you feel better.
Jul 6, 2018 at 0:37 comment added Ken White @NicolBolas: I know why it was deleted. It was deleted because it received sufficient flags as rude or offensive that it was auto-deleted, because the new policies have no intellect or judgement behind the enforcement; they just assume guilt rather than requiring any proof. It's the new lynch mob mentality among all of the newer, low-rep users who think that any request for improvement, clarification, or suggestion that it's off-topic is wrong that started with the Be Nice post that accused everyone who moderates the site of being bigots.
Jul 5, 2018 at 21:02 comment added Nicol Bolas @KenWhite: Then bring it up on the appropriate meta site, asking why it was removed. If that was the total content of your comment, then it should not have been deleted.
Jul 5, 2018 at 20:39 comment added Ken White @NicolBolas: I can, and can give you a specific instance. I recently had multiple rude or offensive flags on a comment I posted that got it deleted. The content in question was a specific quote from the SO help pages: "Questions asking for homework help must include a summary of the work you've done so far to solve the problem, and a description of the difficulty you are having solving it. Can you edit your post to add those things?"
Jul 4, 2018 at 16:09 comment added Nicol Bolas @Draco18s: Any and all comments can be flagged as rude right now. The question is whether such flags are correct. And thus far, I see no reason why a perfectly fine comment would be more likely to be accepted as rude under the new CoC than under the old Be Nice guidance.
Jul 4, 2018 at 16:04 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @NicolBolas Hence my comment about unreachable ideals. I don't know what the solution is either. But a situation were any and all comments can be flagged as "rude" (by a different someone each time) is definitely not it.
Jul 4, 2018 at 16:00 comment added Nicol Bolas @Draco18s: Providing a strict definition of "welcoming", "not nice", and the like would only lead to rules lawyering. I don't know why such words engender such fear in you. Can you not reasonably judge for yourself what seems reasonable and what isn't? Can you not tell why "You could Google that in 5 minutes" is unwelcoming and hostile? And if not... well, I don't know what should be done.
Jul 4, 2018 at 15:56 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @NicolBolas How do you define a "good faith effort?" The CoC draft doesn't say. That is the problem.
Jul 4, 2018 at 15:53 comment added Nicol Bolas @Draco18s: No it isn't. Your point is "you can't stop someone, so why not be rude anyway". My point is "you can't stop someone, but you can at least make a good faith effort". My point is that if you make a good faith effort, then the fault is on them, and everyone can reasonably see that.
Jul 4, 2018 at 15:48 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @NicolBolas You cannot stop someone from choosing to see it as not nice. That's precisely my point.
Jul 4, 2018 at 15:36 comment added Nicol Bolas @Draco18s: Why do you have so much difficulty with the difference between what something is "interpreted as" rather than "what you actually said?" You can write something that is highly unlikely to be "interpreted as" not nice. You cannot stop someone from choosing to see it as not nice. So if you do need to communicate with such a user, do your best to make what you write exceedingly difficult to be "interpreted as" not nice. The line you're referring to is not as thin as you make it out to be.
Jul 4, 2018 at 15:28 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @NicolBolas People want to know the reason behind the action. I want to be able to tell them. Currently the proposed CoC makes it impossible to do so, because anything I could say could be interpreted by somebody somewhere as being "not nice."
Jul 4, 2018 at 15:26 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @Kobi Because people aren't reacting to what you're saying, they're reacting to the fact that your lips are moving. They want to be upset, so they're going to be upset, your words and actions be damned. (Or I suppose, online, it wouldn't be lips, but fingers, but I think you get the point).
Jul 4, 2018 at 7:53 comment added Rui F Ribeiro While I am not usually mr. nice in person, I have had my share of users offended for telling them the question had no technical merits, was wrongly tagged, explaining why I did downvote them, for using british dark humor, and for using known colloquial expressions as the hw is so bad, "feed it to the dog". People will be people.
Jul 4, 2018 at 5:50 comment added Kobi I'm having a hard time following the logic here: People do not care what you think ⇒ People will get offended. How can people get offended if they don't care what you think?
Jul 4, 2018 at 4:59 comment added Nicol Bolas @Draco18s: "New users already see being down voted as part of why the site is unwelcoming" So what? We can control what language we use, so as to not be hurtful to others. If you want to tell others what they're doing wrong, you still have to do it in a reasonable way. However, we cannot control how other people interpret the meaning of our actions. Downvoting, voting to close? Those are actions, not words. And they have very particular meaning. Others may not like them, but they still need to happen; they are an integral part of this site's utility.
Jul 4, 2018 at 4:49 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @NicolBolas See literally every comment ever about "why is my question being down voted?" New users already see being down voted as part of why the site is unwelcoming, being unable to inform them about down votes will not help correct that view.
Jul 4, 2018 at 4:48 comment added Draco18s no longer trusts SE @doppelgreener It happens when people become overly sensitive over the words being used, everyone is forced to bend over backwards to please these people. Instead of doing so, they leave the site, and the people who are left are the self-important twats that everyone else views as "the elitists of sensibilities and language": if you don't use the right words, they get upset and call a moderator on you for being mean. Maybe not actually called that, but that is what they would be in effect.
Jul 4, 2018 at 0:38 comment added Nicol Bolas "There has to be the possibility of people being able to make comments along the lines of "what have you tried?" because questions that show no effort are worthy of downvoting and closure and the attempt to inform the asker that this is the reason that their post is being downvoted and closed should be an acceptable comment." Why? If it's a low-effort post, why is downvoting (closing where appropriate) alone not enough? I certainly see no reason to go further than that if the only advice I could give is "expend more effort".
Jul 3, 2018 at 23:24 comment added doppelgreener How are we going to become more stuck up and elitist if we're actually trying to be welcoming and patient with people? Stack Overflow was looking to many like it was stuck up and elitist well beforehand, that's part of the problem the community's addressing here. At some point we tried, yeah -- but we should keep trying, not because of appearance's sake, but to keep on ensuring new users can be welcomed and use our sites productively.
Jul 3, 2018 at 21:48 review Suggested edits
Jul 3, 2018 at 21:50
Jul 3, 2018 at 21:46 history answered Draco18s no longer trusts SE CC BY-SA 4.0
toggle format