The question received twenty five moderator flags. At least twenty of those were directly related to the controversy caused by this title wording; I haven't had time to count them. This was also a Hot Network Question at the time of the event. (Hello, future people!)
I think I was justified in my actions in this specific case, however I do ...
This looks like a classic case of miscommunication between a user, the community, and a mod.
The mod didn't do anything wrong. A situation was diffused in the quickest way possible.
The original poster didn't ask the question incorrectly.
A Woman's perspective?
I've discussed this situation at length with my girlfriend who is a fellow lover of ...
I'm not in a position to decide policy at this moment, so I'll just provide some of the background information.
If you are a model user, this pattern of account-creating doesn't cause many issues for moderators. More account numbers to keep track of, more scary warning messages to ignore, but that's about it. The only issue I can think of is other members ...
I will allow my fellow moderator to make his own comments on this but here is my take.
When I first came across this question, it had already gathered a long comment trail with arguments for and against the word "Father". Many of these comments, on both sides of the argument, had also attracted flags "Rude or abusive". Also, at the time I came across the ...
Although it hasn't happened on this site, there have been times when I answered a question and only later after some thought decided to vote to close it. What's more common is that I write an answer and later find out that the question is a duplicate, in which case I vote to close it as a duplicate. I think it is not an issue to close questions that you've ...
There are two issues here.
Firstly, one can produce an argument for misbehaviour obtaining any badge. It is a feature of having badges and isn't really a major problem. Once people have the badge, they tend to stop.
The more important issue is rolling back edits in order to keep unpleasantness on the site. I've seen this done on a few sites across SE. It ...
Stackexchange permits all users to maintain multiple accounts. It is if those accounts vote for each other or otherwise abuse the reputation system that moderators and/or staff will intervene.
It is also not compulsory to register an account. If you don't wish to register, you can participate as an unregistered user.
THe main benefit of registering and ...
Disclaimer: This is an official answer (at least, as much as I can make it) because having an opinion is hard and I'm lazy.
You wrote an answer that took from multiple sources, and provided attribution. This is allowed.
You accepted an answer of your choosing. That's your right; not even moderators have the authority to change it.
As a novice user, who mostly browses the site, it seems to fulfil three distinct purposes:
Computer history, both documented and anecdotal. This might include systems, software, programming languages and social or business history.
Maintaining old systems in the present. This includes programming retro systems, or using languages that have fallen out of ...
It's not just novices.
We have some documentation here on meta describing the site's norms and expectations (e.g. scope), but our culture has drifted since then. Our unwritten rules have drifted, and not always in (what I see as) a good way. What's worse, each user's expectations have drifted separately.
Right now, (by my reckoning,) the expectations of ...
Firstly, I approved your edit that included the removal of the controversial block of text. I did consider using the Improve Edit option to leave some or all of that block in the answer. On balance, I agreed that it didn't add to the answer.
Also, I was well aware that the original poster could reintroduce the block or roll it back if they objected to its ...
In my view, edits should:
Preserve the meaning of the post;
Make the post clearer:
For questions, make them easier to answer (up to and including a complete rewrite, so long as the question still invites the answers the author wanted);
For answers, make the existing information easier to understand;
Preserve the voice (writing style) of the author;
The uncontroversial cases would be to edit in order to:
Fix obvious typos, grammar, punctuation and capitalisation mistakes.
Apply formatting markup for readability.
Incorporate clarifications from comments into the post.
Incorporate references to external resources into the body of the post as quotes or embedded images, when reasonable.
Replace dead links ...
Such a post wouldn't be appropriate on the main site. We have had questions about meetups in the past and all have been closed and deleted. This has been discussed before...
Clubs/meetups: in scope?
and the consensus is that they are off-topic.
You are right that we don't have community ads, because we are still a beta site. You could try putting community ...
Allow me to be the first to comment that hasn't actually edited "that question" :-)
The brouhaha appears to be mainly about whether it is right to remove what for want of a better word I'll call "attitude" from the original post.
I cannot answer the broad scope of the question posed to Meta, but I can say that in this particular instance, ...
TL;DR: I think the comment was justified, though not a great idea to post.
You've taken that comment out of context. The very first comment that you posted on Raffzahn's answer was this:
"...equations like this" is shown in the screen shot I've included, I can adjust the wording of the question to reflect that if you'd like. Also, which Wiki are you ...
What can be done to keep both of us happy?
Kiss and make up maybe? Tweak the language of the answer slightly to make it less abrasive. e.g.
That is based on a false assumption i.e. that there are byte "cells" on a floppy disk.
I don't think there is anything wrong with the general structure. As the author of the answer states, this is a Q and A site. We ...
(a. Took me some time to find this, as the title didn't relate to me)
(b. tl;dr - Short answer to your question here at the end)
First off all, I'm very thankful to you (@CJ Dennis) and several other for all the work on improving spelling and grammar of my posts, as I'm neither native English nor careful enough when typing (blaming it on my lousy tablet ...
I've had some sour feedback about it and it seems one of the other answerers resented that.
For one, as it was me, I would prefer to be called by name, not some vague wording. Especially if it's quite clear whom you're talking about (*1). Equaly important, unlike you seam to belive, my remark wasn't in any way related to me writing an answer as well. I may ...
What is this community’s stance on the extent to which editing posts is appropriate?
You won't get the community's view on the question. Just that of the few users that visit meta and then the subset of them that want to post.
Answering the main question: avoid editing posts. Edit as little as possible.
I edit posts quite a lot. I do so to correct typos' ...
I believe this mixes two separate issues:
Closing a question and
Answering a question
Separate but they are tied in a non trivial relation, as both are commanded by two imperatives:
Questions that do not fit the site (*1) should be closed.
Questions one knows an answer for should be answered.
The result is that both actions are equally appropriate and ...
The question is about being welcoming to new users, so I'll address that.
Is this comment a good or at least representative reflection of this site's collective attitude?
Based on a read of most of the comments and another answer there, people found my question to be interesting and took time to explain several aspects of the subject to me. It was ...
Instead of going all political or analytical (dictionary, really?), wouldn't it be simpler to use more accurate words that also happen not to have a gazillion other conflictual meanings?
This is the perfect example: The poster wrote "father" but meant "promoter". Two birds with one stone.