Misuse of mod privilege?
This question may be only for @Olin Lathrop but I would like to hear others opinion
When I had asked the question he just said that "What's the question?"- 'This "question" is just lecturing on complex impedance. Ask a specific question if you have one. Note that lecturing while asking a question often makes is harder to answer, so more likely the question will be skipped.'(thread is deleted by him). I believe it was too broad when I asked it. Later I said that I got my answer in the same thread and deleted my question.
He replied "You should fix questions instead of deleting them. I have undeleted it so that everyone can see what's going on. This could be a good question if a less broad question were asked, and much of the lecturing removed. For now I'm going to close it because it is too broad. That way it can still be fixed, and everyone gets to see how the rules are being applied. Post disappearing in the night is usually bad for building a community."
So I told myself that I would like to see the community to grow so that I have to edit the question. I didn't replied in comment after editing. Olin had directly undeleted the question without any kind of permission which was too disrespectful (for me that moment). When I edited the question I was waiting for few days to see if he says anything about the edit. Unfortunately, he doesn't even care of that. Someone in the same thread (which I linked earlier) said :
I think the question "what is reactance" is perfectly good. For people with a lot of experience this may seem as a very basic question, or a very broad question, since over the years you get to actually expand your knowledge. But for new students and engineers these topics are not basic and straightforward. Closing questions like that seems like gatekeeping.
To add to that, now the OP has potentially taken wrong information as his reference because the network of professionals this site claims to be is actively shutting him out.
After the comment, I replied to Olin that Is the question still off-topic? He replied,"OK, I reopened it".
If a mod have right to undelete a question as he want then he must note all the things of edit, closing etc without any kind of permission or reply.
I thought Olin had undeleted the question for betterment of the community where the second behaviour of Olin completely disagrees with the statement. I personally likes Olin for his work through the Codidact-wide communities (all community).
I was thinking to discuss about it when I saw the behaviour. But waited to see something else (that just finally happened). In that question, there was two thread, naming their title below :
What's the question? ~ created by Olin
Your top two equations are equations of impedance and not reactance. ~ created by Andy Aka
What's the reason behind deleting both thread?
I can't see why both thread deleted. I will simply call it, misuses of mod privilege. A comment should be deleted when it only contains "Thank you", "can't say how much it helped", "welcome", "hello!", "you again" etc etc..... When something is irrelevant to the question or answer then the comment should be deleted. But what's going on here? kidding? "He has power, he can does whatever he wants". Never forget he was elected by us.
Do you want to see anything else about Olin Lathrop in other community?
Define your variables(thread) in PCD. When I saw the comment it was just like joke to me. Replying to Olin Lathrop, "I can show you thousands of question in PSE where they never defined their variables and function". When there's some weird notation then they describe them. Like if you don't specify a theory then $\phi$ can represent lots of things. Then they should specify what it actually represents. His comments are just silly. He used to describe all the term when he uses any equation in Electrical that doesn't mean everyone has to. Even I replied to him that 'I don't care of your downvote'. Cause in the past year I had seen misuse of voting. It only didn't happen to me. It also happened to Olin also and some other people around the community. Olin once said in comment, "Why the question downvote? Is it experimentally (he used similar term not this iirc) wrong?"
(I don't have enough time to link all the comments and answers. Its almost a year so that they gone too far.)
Another important thing to note that is we should change the way we used to elect a mod. An online person doesn't know anything about the person whom they are nominating. I just love the way he nominated himself. Describe yourself, what you know, what you have done. It's OK if you are new to Codidact. But if you have moderate any other group or anything else like Discord, FB group etc etc. Show that to us. It's important to know what a person knows rather than hanging here and there and nominating a random person. (It should goes to new question but I don't think I can do that now so leaving it right here. Since somehow both of them are relevant.)
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.
Comments are intended to be ephemeral. They're used to hammer out issues with a post, to discuss how it could be improved, etc. When they've served that purpose, they can and should be removed.
Comments are not there for:
- answers
- arguments
- off-topic chatter
- discussion of policy (that's what Meta categories are for)
- any useful information that should stick around
Comments that are any of those or that are otherwise no longer useful should be expected to be deleted. I've had a read through the linked threads, and I can't find anything there that shouldn't have been deleted - I can only see disagreements over policy (which should come here to Meta), and pointers on ways to improve the question which have been resolved one way or another.
As for moderator elections, that's something we'd like to do but we don't yet have the community size to support it. A representative election needs a decent number of voters; the people who would become voters in a moderator election are the frequent, engaged users, and that's what we're trying to build on. For the moment, we've appointed moderators to steward these communities through that process; once an election is likely to succeed we'll look at the ways of doing that.
0 comment threads
It seems your main question is why all the comments to your question about reactance were deleted. I deleted them because they were no longer relevant. They pointed out problems with the question, and explained why it was closed. You then fixed the question, it was reopened, and it has now gotten two answers. That's how the system is supposed to work.
From the site help:
Think of comments as the scaffolding and construction lines used to build posts. When all done, they should be, and often are, removed.
The comments to your question were handled according to this policy.
I also think that your post looks better to others with the comments removed. All people see is a reasonable questions. Showing the dirty laundry it took to get there isn't in the site's interest, and not in yours either. I'm not sure what you hope to gain by keeping the comments.
I am not going to address the part of your question about my actions on a different site. That has no place here on this site.
1 comment thread