As an FYI, the question referenced has been undeleted and can be edited into shape should the community desire.

Appreciate it, but like I say this isn't a problem about this one question, it's an ongoing pattern in our community here.

If we strive to "build a library" of questions and answers, we would lose some of the specific details that only helps the asker in favour of something a bit more general that can help many more people. This would make it much harder for commenters and answerers to minimise the asker's feelings and problems, because there simply wouldn't be enough specifics in the question to make any sort of judgement about that. 1/2

2/2 You can't exactly say "just ignore it" if "it" might be something really, really bad. You also can't say "go to HR" if it's really minor. You need to present the options, when they might apply, with pros and cons, so the asker can make the decision for themselves. Of course it's not going to be perfect, but I'm sure it will be better than what we have now. You're also less likely to have people feeling inclined to post their own thoughts, without taking much care to post a well-thought-out high-quality answer that meets our standards.

Sweet, contribute that as an answer! Not allowing comment arguments to thrive is, I think, an important element for sure.

I am disappointed but not surprised by all the downvotes. Really, you don't think there's anything to improve here?

We aren't made of glass, you know. I would suggest "STOP PANDERING"

@mxyzplk I just posted comments because those can't be downvoted... I already have a pretty good idea where this community stands on that idea.

Yeah, unfortunately.

I’m voting to close this question because I have no desire to have this stack tear itself apart

@NotThatGuy at least have the courage to post an answer

Do you have data to back this up beyond two instances on a recent question that was discussed on meta? You're making some very serious allegations here about what you observe as pervasive discrimination that I would simply call confirmation bias. Questions around sexism are often closed because in my experience as a moderator they are very often used by trolls exactly because they are hot-button issues. If you believe legitimate questions are being caught in the crossfire then that warrants addressing. Absent real data all I can say to this opinion post is that I disagree with your take.

I will say that any instance of "victim blaming" in any shape or form should be flagged and will be removed. The same goes for comments amounting to "I don't think X is a problem because it's never happened to me". Just flag that and move on. The comment will be gone soon without anyone even needing to go into the merits of such an argument. It's not what the comments are for and that alone should help to an extent. Beyond that I'm not sure I have much more to add beyond my comment on this related meta question.

@Old_Lamplighter It's not about courage, I'm just tired of all that.

@lilienthal I see plenty, any search for topics like this reveals a bunch, but I feel adding a fistful of more examples will just get argued over and no I don’t have a statistical analysis. I think the dramatic reaction even to this meta Q shows how open people are to hearing about it. We can’t discuss how to get better without a logical proof of the problem? Sounds like an unwelcoming environment to those with this kind of problem to me.

@Lilienthal I'm not quite sure how common this is in objective terms, but looking at the top 5 answers on that post, 3 of them are basically "your feelings are wrong and here's why". These aren't blatantly offensive, but I'm still sure such responses can make some feel quite unwelcome. The top-voted answer might go a bit too far in assuming good intentions and not addressing how to escalate things in case there was some malicious intent and/or things don't go quite as hoped, but overall that one's probably fine (answers commonly don't address the "what if that doesn't work" question).

@NotThatGuy If you think an answer is wrong, you provide a different one. That's how it works. I've actually upvoted answers that I've vehemently disagreed with because they were good answers.

@Old_Lamplighter I don't think they're "wrong" (or at least that's not the issue I have with them), I think they're offensive. For that the solution is not to write your own answer, but rather to get rid of the existing one. But it's the kind of offensive that's tolerated and even welcomed here, so my downvote and/or flag wouldn't do anything.

@NotThatGuy who welcomes offensiveness here? If you've seen it welcomed, tell the moderators and they will address it.

@NotThatGuy So, are you saying that MR Positive or Lillenthal, et cet would ignore legitimate flags?

You two have leveled some very serious charges at this stack and at the moderators here, and aren't backing it up with anything. You want to talk about offensive? THAT is offensive

@Old_Lamplighter The answers I pointed out above have a score of between 14 and 83. That's plenty of people who welcome such answers. The mods would decline a flag on an answer if they feel the answer is acceptable as is, which I expect they will for those particular answers. But of course offensiveness is subjective and I can only speak to my own opinion, I just find it a bit sad that such content is received so well here.

@NotThatGuy THIS has a rating of over 400 and talks about how to deal with autistic coworkers. So, why are you assuming ill intent when it is clear that the community values sensitive answers more than that which you consider rude?

@NotThatGuy What makes me sad is the fact that there are so many white knights out there who would strip "marginalized" people of their agency simply to make other people think they care.

@Old_Lamplighter I'm not assuming any intent. I'm saying plenty of people on the receiving end of such sentiment probably doesn't appreciate it. If you offend someone, they are offended regardless of what your intention was.

@Old_Lamplighter I'll concede that it's bad to treat groups of people like precious children that need to be protected, without really caring how they actually feel about an issue, but it's also bad to go too far in the opposite direction and just let them fend completely for themselves. Things I have a problem with (which includes the question mentioned here) are things I've heard people complain about, things I'd personally dislike if I were on the receiving end of and things that simply aren't particularly kind, considerate or empathetic (which are important values).

@NotThatGuy I will say from personal experience, the worst discrimination I have faced is from omnipotent moral busybodies telling me how I won't be able to do X because I was born Y. The bullies treated me just like everyone else, they looked for weakness. The busybodies BELIEVED I was weak.

@NotThatGuy Now, when I see something I think crosses the line, I've been pretty vocal. Nobody would call me a pushover, and, as I pointed out, one of my most highly rated answers was about how to treat autistic people in the workplace, and it was very well received. The most important thing anyone can do to stave off harsh words is to give them no power.

@Old_Lamplighter From my perspective you're trying to speak for others much more so than this post (or at least than I am, as I can't speak for the author of this post). If I would be offended by something, it's hardly a stretch to say some people would be offended by it (might even call that a fact). When I call out speech making me uncomfortable, it doesn't really matter if it would actually offend someone else, because I'm speaking about my own discomfort. Your argument basically comes down to minimising those feelings of mine, which seems quite ironic on a post about minimising feelings.

@NotThatGuy So, you want to be more welcoming to the "marginalized communities", but are dismissing the opinions of one of the most active members among those marginalized people, and attempting to minimalize that person's feelings. By your own statement, you want to be more inviting to marginalized people, at least until one disagrees with you, right?

@Old_Lamplighter It seems perfectly reasonable to dismiss an opinion trying to invalidate anyone's feelings, especially my own, or one trying to speak for everyone else. You most certainly don't speak for me. I also can't speak for anyone else, but I wasn't trying to. I'm only speaking about my own feelings. I'll also support marginalised groups as far as I feel comfortable and they appreciate, but for me this issue is hardly about that. It's about people being rude to others, which would be true regardless of what gender, race, etc. the person on the other side may be.

@NotThatGuy So, I don't speak for you, but you feel perfectly entitled to speak for people who are marginalized? You want to support us, but are being completely dismissive to one who disagrees with your stance. So, you support us, just so long as we behave and do as you say? Well, that sounds rather paternalistic. Maybe we just don't like being treated like children.

@Old_Lamplighter I'm honestly struggling to figure out why you keep (hypocritically) dragging back in the issue of speaking for marginalised groups when I'm talking about "people being rude to others, which would be true regardless of what gender, race, etc. the person on the other side may be". Rudeness I don't appreciate seeing at all. Rudeness I wouldn't appreciate being on the other end of. Rudeness I have been on the other end of. Rudeness that is arguably even in this very thread. Am I really not entitled to speak for MYSELF? Because that's what you seem to be saying here.

Exactly. “I am autistic therefore you are not allowed to talk about people getting slagged on this stack for asking questions about discrimination” is the sum total of this illogical argument and I’m not engaging with it any more.

@mxyzplk but you feel free to speak for me and call me "marginalized" which is about the most offensive thing you can call someone. I'm not on the margins, I'm front and center and taking on bigotry.

@NotThatGuy Well, this question itself does just that, presumes to speak for "marginalized groups". I find the very term "marginalized" to be about the most offensive thing you can call someone. This is quite literally "othering" people who are not like you. Can you see how this may get under someone's skin?

The only place I talk about you is where I mention how new posters are dismissed by people saying "well what about me I got discriminated against for being X once". As usual you are using this as a brickbat to dissuade people from discussion. I’m not interested in that.

@mxyzplk I've been discriminated against more than once, and I have more than one disability. You come in here and libel this stack. Since you like callout culture so much, I'm calling you out for doing it. You still don't realize how offensive it is to calling people marginalized and how that is "othering" them. You are getting literally ZERO people agreeing with you who are of the class you call "marginalized". Why is that?

@Old_Lamplighter As with many words used to describe groups of people, different people have different opinions about the word "marginalised" (including those in that group). There's perhaps a discussion to be had around whether that word should be used, but this probably isn't the place and we (or at least I) probably aren't the people to be having that discussion.

I used "marginalized" because that's what the SO blog post linked uses, because someone objects to everything so I figure I'll just use what the larger SO discussion is using terminology wise.

@NotThatGuy just some food for thought. Do you think that anyone covered by that term invented it? How would you feel if a term like that was used to describe you? That you're an "other" or "on the fringe" or "different"? Do I lose my special status because after decades of fighting, I'm in the mainstream? Am I a bad person because I'm trying to pull others in?

@mxyzplk We can certainly discuss how we can do better. But this post seems to have a bigger axe to grind considering the seriousness of the allegations here. If you had phrased this as "do we have a problem?" or "how can we make sure we treat X or Y topics with more care?" I don't believe you'd have received this type of reaction.

@NotThatGuy Well, as I mentioned on the other meta thread the nature of those answers (mostly posted by newer users and upvoted by HNQ visitors) was a reason I would have for deleting it. But that deletion has now been reversed with all these problematic answers restored. I'm not sure what exactly you'd prefer to see then? If the issue is unprofessional/bad answers coming from HNQ there is little to be done short of closing the post once that's happened.

@Lilienthal Deleting a question just seems like the wrong solution to problematic answers. Deleting the question sends the message that we don't want questions like those. Deleting a question that's okay by itself might make sense if the whole thread is just a giant dumpster fire that can't really be salvaged, but that's not the impression I get here. If I agreed the question is likely trolling and opinion-based (more so than other questions), then I might also agree that the answers could push it over the edge (if it isn't already there), but I don't agree with either the former or the latter

@Lilienthal If we want to send the message that specific answers are bad, and address the issue clearly and publicly instead of more just sweeping it under the rug, then it would make more sense to delete those answers. Possibly first or instead add a notice to them to potentially fix them. But there's a fair amount of nuance involved in understanding what's actually wrong with them and I expect deleting them would come with a fair amount of backlash (including from plenty of regulars). So I don't really hold it against the mods for not doing that, but at least it's something to think about.

@NotThatGuy We judge posts on multiple levels. We never delete answers for being incorrect, only for bigger issues like illegal behaviour. I simply mean that the low quality answers that were the result of poor/partial assessments of a very tricky problem can be a factor. It does leave the question of how we'd best tackle a situation like this where HNQ popularity results in top answers all being substandard. Perhaps the correct response to this instance was to keep it deleted and repost a more canonical question on the subject that doesn't run into the "you are wrong" attitude towards the OP.

@NotThatGuy there is already a mechanism in place, it is called "voting". If the votes are not going your way, the problem may not be with the votes.

@NotThatGuy by the way, who decides which answers are "problematic"?

We derive community consensus on Meta on how to handle stuff like that. Here's a simple example from RPG.SE. There, people have different game playstyles. We had a lot of issues with someone posting about how to do something with their game, and a bunch of people dumping on them about how their playstyle was bad and they didn't agree with it. That was not helpful to anyone, so we had a meta discussion and determined that answers to questions like that which questioned their playstyle were considered unhelpful by the community, and community members and mods should action them accordingly.

So @Lilienthal reread my question. Again, I'm not saying the mods are bad or whatever, I don't know what 'allegations' are so severe here. I am saying that many questions, when they have an OP who is sharing behavior that they see as negative and could fall under discriminatory behavior of some type, are stampeded on. Go look at any of these questions - you can see the deleted answers and history as well as I can. People warn them against saying things are sexist or racist or discrimination (even when they didn't, as with the most recent post).

They tell them they shouldn't feel that way (several of the answers and many of the comments on the recent post). They demand for the OP to "prove it's from a bad motivation" (as if that matters). You personally made a good answer to workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/103200/… and got complaints about "it's not sexism" on your answer.

I don't know what's happened in the intervening years to make these questions even more poorly received (I mean, there's a lot of deletion on that one too) but it seems to me they are, and a large percentage of the interaction on them is not helpful to the poster, it's just defensive. And even if mods delete it, the OP still gets two barrels full of crap and doesn't have a good experience here.

@mxyzplk I guess the feelings of people who have been subject to actual discrimination are beyond your interest, eh?

Just because you've been discriminated against doesn't mean you're welcoming to others that have been. You say there's absolutely no problem and people who are discriminated against should just figure it out themselves and any discussion about helping is "white knighting" - so no, I don't see any of that as contributing to actual exploration of the problem or solutions.

@mxyzplk I would appreciate the cessation of lies on your part. I have never said there is absolutely no problem, and If you are going to suggest that I have been unwelcoming, back it up. What I find unwelcoming is the proverbial monkey trying to save a fish from drowning by placing it safely in the tree.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

@Lilienthal I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure if something is offensive, that could violate the CoC or terms of service and justify outright deletion by mods, even if it has a few upvotes. But this probably isn't offensive enough for that. Other SE sites also have no problem adding moderator notes or even deleting answers (even highly voted ones) when they don't meet the quality guidelines set by the moderator team and/or Meta community. I did also mention more canonical questions somewhere here, although as a more general policy or approach to how we ask and answer questions.

@NotThatGuy Why are you so dead set on censoring people?

@Old_Lamplighter Just about every website, including Stack Exchange, "censors" people who don't follow the rules, which generally includes saying offensive things. If you have a problem with how just about every website on the internet works, fair enough, but I don't really feel the need to defend something basically everyone does.

@NotThatGuy You've offended me by using the term "marginalized" repeatedly. What should happen to you?

@Old_Lamplighter I find it quite concerning how hard you're fighting against an idea which basically comes down to "we should be nicer to each other". Maybe it wasn't phrased perfectly, and maybe it's even misguided (in your opinion), but that's still what the guiding principle here is. The only rational thing I can really conclude based on that is that you want everyone to treat everyone else with complete and total indifference and shouldn't try to extend them even the smallest kindness. If that's what you believe, fair enough, I guess. If not, you might want to reflect on your response here

@NotThatGuy No, that's not the case at all. If it were, the "Be nice" rule, and "Assume good intentions" would be more than enough for you. The fact that you are lying about my intentions proves that, especially given my answers on how to deal with discrimination and how to address people with disabilities. I won't be bullied by your libel

@NotThatGuy Furthermore, if you had bothered to listen to a single thing I said, you'd know that my concern is that moral busybodies tend to make things worse, best illustrated by the quote “'Kindly let me help you or you will drown,' said the monkey putting the fish safely up a tree" by Alan Watts. If you're going to make any changes, you'd better be damn sure that you're not that monkey, You haven't asked a word of anyone you are championing for, and are entirely dismissing the word of the one person who has come forward and addressed you directly. What makes you so damn sure of yourself?

@Old_Lamplighter I'm telling you how I'm interpreting what you wrote, and how others may interpret it as well. You're free to do with that information what you will. If it were me, I'd reflect on that and consider that maybe I need to change my words so how people interpret it will be closer to my intention. But if you want to insist that you didn't mean it that way and my subjective interpretation is somehow a "lie", I can't stop you.

@Old_Lamplighter It doesn't sound like you bothered to listen to a single thing I said, because you keep coming back to the same points that have already been addressed a few times. I could probably just copy-paste from earlier comments and that would address what you said in your latest comment, but that seems a bit pointless, so I'll just refer back to my earlier comments instead.

@NotThatGuy No, you are deliberately distorting what I wrote. I've written several answers on how to deal with workplace discrimination, so I'd like to know how you inferred indifference or malice from that. And no, there's nothing wrong with my words, as only two people on this entire stack seem to be be misinterpreting them. If you were unsure, you'd seek clarification. Nobody here agrees with you, and you're being downright nasty about it.

@Old_Lamplighter You've been talking down to me in quite a few of your comments, you dismiss my feelings as invalid, and you've even called me a liar and a bully. And all just because I'm trying to get people to be nicer to one another? And you say I'm being nasty?

@NotThatGuy actually, I think you're being offensive. And, since I'm in a "marginalized group" (several, actually) doesn't mean that my feelings should trump yours? If not, how does that jibe with what you're saying. And yes, you two have been trying to shout me down. I'm tired of ableist condescension and of being helped against my will. This fish will take the chance of drowning. I stand a far better chance, even with all the fisherman out there, than I do from a monkey putting me in a tree.

@Old_Lamplighter All you've really achieved in the last how-many-ever comments is demonstrate to me that you're incapable of engaging in civilised discourse for a number of reasons, so I'm done (and yeah, I'm sure you'll probably say the same about me).

@NotThatGuy I've been making a point, which you don't seem to get. If you disagree, that's fine, but I'm going to continue to try. I actually think that your heart is in the right place, which is why I keep posting to you rather than just disregarding what you have to say. When I'm done with people, I just don't bother.

@NotThatGuy sometimes, in order to help people, you need to be harsh with your advice. There are some people who need a kick in the backside before they listen. Others need a softer touch. When helping people you need as many tools as possible. There have been times when I have deliberately annoyed people into helping themselves, and other times when I've done some hand holding, If you look at my answers, you can see I've taken both approaches. Knowing when to take which requires some wisdom and effort. But taking one off of the table doesn't help the people who would have been helped.

@NotThatGuy There was one instance on this site where I got quite a few nasty messages for being too rough on the OP. The OP, however, reached out into chat and thanked me.

@NotThatGuy So, what you're left with is a typ1-type2 error problem. On the one hand, you want to help as many people as possible, and risk offending some. On the other hand, you want to limit the offense to people, while risking not helping as many as you could otherwise help. You're approach seems to be, now correct me if I'm wrong, is to limit offense at all cost. Which is a fine motive, but in so doing, you need to understand that fewer people will be helped.

@NotThatGuy Now, you could be right, but you need to be aware of the fact that what you are proposing is minimizing the possibility of one error at the expense of the other. So, let's say we do as you wish, what will the negative effects be?