Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Why was this answer to the volunteer-discussion removed?
For what reasons post (answer or question) might be removed by moderator / staff ?
I do not ask about obvious reasons like spam, off-topic, base rule violations, etc here.
Context: history.
Obviously, author of the post wasn't agreed with decision.
To my opinion this answer is bad: hasty and rash. I, personally, would suggest removing it to its author. But I see no reason to delete it forcefully.
In the answer that I've referenced above author merely expressed they opinion: no more. They might be completely wrong but they has rights to express it freely, isn't it ?
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
That answer (and this meta question) prompted a lot of discussion. This discussion is a good outcome. We are by the community, for the community, which means if the community questions what we're doing, we need to discuss that. We don't need to keep engaging if someone is clearly out to be disruptive (i.e. don't feed the trolls), but that's not what happened here. I think we have a group of people who care deeply about Codidact and its communities (good!) who don't always agree (expected!) and who vary in how they express themselves (also expected).
The answer, especially in the broader context of the question (from the same author) and other activity, came across as disrespectful bordering on personal attack. Criticism of decisions is fine, and encouraged -- if you see something that concerns you, bring it up! But criticism still needs to be constructive, and "you should all step down and give me complete power" doesn't sound very constructive. What productive responses could we expect from that?
When faced with a moderation issue we strive to take the smallest action that fixes the problem. A single rude comment? Delete it. An otherwise-ok post with some problematic content? Edit it. A user skirting the boundaries of acceptable behavior? Send a warning. Somebody suddenly going wild with inappropriate behavior (drunk, compromised account, whatever)? Suspend to stop the damage and then discuss. And so on.
This answer attracted flags and struck several team members as being on the wrong side of the line. Deleting it seemed the best response in the moment. But the issue can be fixed with an edit, allowing the post to be undeleted, so we have done that. The edit removed one problematic paragraph and also changed some talk-about-yourself-in-the-third-person language that was obfuscating this self-answer.
Codidact is a volunteer-run project. The team members care deeply about Codidact. We are not instantly available when there is a problem. That would be true even if we were employees, because people sleep and have families and stuff like that. I'd like to point out that I and several others took an hour out of our work days to respond to this situation instead of deferring it. We are here to work together with the community as we all work through growth, policies, and features. Let's all try to keep it constructive; it's entirely possible to express strong contrary opinions without making it personal.
Update: The answer has been edited and undeleted.
The last paragraph - the one calling for staff to step down if they cannot make Codidact their top priority - has been removed, since that constitutes a personal attack against the volunteer Codidact staff. It's also been edited to make it clearer that the person writing the answer is the same person who wrote the original question.
In its edited state, since it no longer contains personal attacks, the post no longer qualifies for deletion and so has been restored.
It was deleted for being disrespectful and inciting drama.
The post attacks the (volunteer) staff members putting time, effort, and money into running these sites, dismissing their efforts because of a perception that the site should take precedence over living a real life. The post states that that should step down as staff members if they cannot make Codidact their top priority, which constitutes a personal attack against, well, the entire team, since pretty much the entire Codidact team has stated that they have other priorities aside from CD.
That personal attack was quite disrespectful, and rather rude, especially coupled with the request contained within that answer to be appointed CEO of Codidact. (Which, by the way, doesn't exist; Codidact does not and will not have a CEO position as far as I am aware.)
It's also sparking drama, as seen by the comments on the post.
I deleted it for those reasons, in discussion with other members of the team.
There's a bug that currently allows the OP to undelete their own posts if it's moderator-deleted; that's an oversight and will be fixed ASAP. That's why it kept getting undeleted and redeleted.
I'd also like to quote from the moderator help (available on GH as well):
Breaking the spirit of the law is also a problem. If you have a user who's continuously causing problems within your community, that's a problem, even if they're not technically breaking the letter of the law.
It was deleted with that in mind; even if it's not technically breaking the letter of any current rules, the fact that it's causing problems and drama is an issue in of itself.
1 comment thread