Timeline for Why was this answer left locked open?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
33 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2017 at 21:10 | comment | added | Null Mod | @Möoz No, you were not the only one who admitted voting for the user rather than the post. Mike explicitly said so as well, and there were lots of other comments about the user's past history (e.g. this one). | |
| Oct 2, 2017 at 21:02 | comment | added | Möoz | @doppelgreener FYI, it's currently at +12 / -0. :) | |
| Oct 2, 2017 at 21:01 | comment | added | Möoz |
To be fair, I believe I was the only one who openly said I'd voted for the user, that's far from the community's desire to delete the answer in question is motivated by dislike of the user who posted it
|
|
| Oct 1, 2017 at 17:30 | comment | added | doppelgreener | @Null On that note, this addendum suggestion I left yesterday seems to be gaining some support. (I can't see the vote totals to assess its possible contentiousness but it's net positive.) I think it might affect what to do with that answer, and it might represent what's going on such that people want this particular post gone anyway. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 19:03 | comment | added | Null Mod | Also, as a practical matter specific to this situation: I need to unlock the post so you can edit and improve it, but the minute I do that it will attract votes to delete it. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 19:03 | comment | added | Null Mod | Without that evidence, your answer looks like a nothing but an excuse to post your own political opinions. I will not allow users to delete your post simply because they don't like you, but it's reasonable to vote to delete an answer because it is downvoted and lacks evidence. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 19:03 | comment | added | Null Mod | @ChristieRomanowski As established by the community support for my meta answer on political discussions, you are permitted to discuss politics in order to do an analysis of a SFF work. I gave an example of an answer explaining a character's political motivations. While you have established that it's within the realm of possibility for someone to think Churchill was as evil as Hitler, the claim that a British character (Dumbledore) would think that way of the British Prime Minister is dubious and needs more evidence... | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 18:36 | comment | added | Doctor Doom | @Null From when do lack of canonical citations have become reason to delete answers? Lots of highly voted answers on the site don't give canonical citations when logical reasoning is good enough. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 18:27 | history | edited | NullMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 470 characters in body
|
| S Sep 29, 2017 at 17:55 | history | mod moved comments to chat | |||
| S Sep 29, 2017 at 17:55 | comment | added | Null Mod | Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 16:52 | comment | added | Doctor Doom | @Valorum Attribution to a fictional character is a logical reasoning here. Read that answer again. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 16:41 | comment | added | Valorum | @ChristieRomanowski - Posting something offensive and then attributing it to a fictional character without attribution is worthy of deletion | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 16:38 | comment | added | Doctor Doom | @Edlothiad Citation is entirely another issue. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 16:37 | comment | added | Edlothiad | @ChristieRomanowski what, you're head canon of dumbledore believes? So not something that can be sourced from the books? So entirely pointless? So your post was just political? Got it. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 16:22 | comment | added | Edlothiad | @ChristieRomanowski where is that implicit? Show some evidence to back up your thoughts. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:57 | comment | added | Edlothiad | You claim this answer now is similar to your TMITHC analogy. But that's just false. Your analogy stated why Smith would've agreed with the politics relevant to your answer. The level of genocide or slaughtering or whatever the BRITISH EMPIRE did as a whole is entirely irrelevant. Churchill's few years may have been relevant but even then, it should provide evidence in the source work that this was the opinion of the author or the opinion she imposed on her characters. Instead it mentions one relevant character name, and then a bunch of political bullshit that's offensive and off-topic | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:54 | comment | added | Edlothiad | "The British opposite of Hitler (Winston Churchill) was also not a saint -- he has been criticized as being just as evil as Hitler by some in the real world (for example, 'Winston Churchill is no better than Adolf Hitler,' says Indian politician Dr Shashi Tharoor). Hitler was simply a leader of one of equally cruel factions at war." there is nothing in that paragraph that is relevant to canon. It remains to be a user forcing their political opinion. Whether or not Churchill is as evil as Hitler's is IRRELEVANT to this question. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:54 | comment | added | Edlothiad | You claim to have edited the answer to adhere to the policy. This is the controversial paragraph in its current state. "Talking about Dumbledore acting out of altruism to kill the evil, Hitler couldn't be seen as the only bad guy from the perspective of the Wizarding World. The sad truth of the world is that the winners of the war and powerful nations always enforce their version of history on the world. One could argue that if you look at the torture and murder stats, Nazi Germany and even the Mongol Empire would look like a kid in front of the British Empire." | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:52 | comment | added | Doctor Doom | @Valorum It is implicit that this is what Dumbledore thought. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:43 | comment | added | Skooba | @Null Please explain how adding the "Dumbledore thought" turns that answer into a "meaningful analysis"? | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:32 | comment | added | Skooba | @ChristieRomanowski I fail to see how the edits make the post any less offensive. You should add support to your claims from the source material. Otherwise what is stopping me from saying "Dumbledore thought that are you intentionally trolling, and generally not a good person" --- Don't flag for delete this comment, it is what Dumbledore thinks! | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:30 | comment | added | Valorum | Sorry, but no. It still contains the sentence "Hitler was simply a leader of one of equally cruel factions at war." which I find offensive. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:21 | comment | added | Doctor Doom | @Skooba The answer has already been edited to make it adhere with new policy.. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 15:13 | comment | added | Skooba | @Null The question has been reopened. What should we assume to be a reasonable response time to handle the locked answer? | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:38 | comment | added | Null Mod | @Skooba It currently has two undelete votes. Gather the necessary undelete and reopen votes if you want to see it reopened. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:36 | comment | added | Valorum | @Skooba - I agree. The question has merit. I'm happy to have it reopened, as long as the offending answer is going to be deleted | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:33 | comment | added | Skooba | Also, the question should not have been deleted. It is a legitimate question that has legitimate answer backed-up by canon sources. My opinion would be to reopen the question and delete the offensive answer now that a final decision has been made. (Or is that going to require another meta post?) | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:31 | comment | added | Valorum | I think perhaps the lesson to be learned here is that when someone posts an answer that a wide variety of users seem to find offensive, locking it open pending meta discussion is probably the wrong action. Better to lock it deleted, despite the possibility that this may exclude lower rep users from being able to see the offensive content. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:29 | comment | added | Null Mod | @Valorum Explaining this sooner could have skewed the voting on the meta question I answered for the general case. As it was, some users kept trying to get me to comment on the Dumbledore/Hitler post in the comments/chatroom for my answer. I deliberately and repeatedly avoided commenting on the controversial post in that meta thread in order to avoid poisoning the discussion/voting about political commentary in general. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:19 | comment | added | Valorum | This also seems like a bit of a cop-out. Was there ever any doubt that the decision was going to go in favour of us not using the site as a launching point for extreme political views? | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:17 | comment | added | Valorum | Explaining this sooner (instead of just ignoring my and others comments) would have obviated the need for me to to ask this question. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 14:15 | history | answered | NullMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |