« first day (1096 days earlier)   

5:23 AM
@user170039 sure. You'll find it's undeleted now
 
Sorry, I mentioned the wrong room, I meant this room @mixedmath.
 
ok
 
@mixedmath @quid @DanielFischer @MichaelGreinecker: What can be done about people who insinuate that delete-voters would have no scruples to burn people at the stake and should have their mugshots posted on the internet? I feel I must repeat this (which quid agrees to):
yesterday, by user21820
@quid: I'm pretty sure that some people are discussing things behind my back, but for what it's worth, I do not see how people who posts comments inciting violence should even be allowed on SE, not to say Math SE.
 
@user21820 Flag the comment; or if it was an egregious comment that was deleted but which still causes concern, flag the post where the comment appears and write a custom-flag message.
I mean this as a general answer to "What can be done..."
 
Okay, but I am asking in this particular case, because clearly this user and his supporters (the 3 downvoters on my Meta post) are not going to stop their nonsense unless you moderators clearly state that you do not condone such behaviour.
I know @quid previously stated that I should focus on the mathematical nonsense aspect, but I feel that is not quite right; such users are toxic to the community.
 
5:43 AM
@user21820 I want to indicate that I have read this comment, and I think I understand where you're coming from. But I do not currently have a point of view strong enough to act on it. I'll leave this as is and see if perhaps another moderator has a stronger opinion.
I would like to say that this is a great place for custom mod flags, but in fact all these comments occurred in chat. There is much less moderator memory in chat, and it's more or less a wild West
 
@mixedmath Thank you, and I will wait for the other moderators' input. Note that I'm not asking for deletion of the second linked comment (the first is already deleted), but for an unambiguous statement by the moderators on the Meta post that violence inciting is not condoned.
I don't think merely dealing with mathematical nonsense is sufficient to stop this dangerous user.
 
 
5 hours later…
10:23 AM
@user21820 I agree this is somewhat troubling, even though I'm not sure the backstabbing comment applies directly to delete voters, apart from a logical inference that might take a rather unlogical incoherent rant too seriously. There is also the aspect that some of it might be plain bullshitting- in the technical sense of Harry Frankfurt's book.
I don't believe it likely that someone really things that burning humans is comparable to deleting votes. That is rather overdramatic bullshitting. But I agree that something should be done, and I will discuss this in the secret mod lair.
2
 
10:46 AM
yup, sounds like a drama queen to me
 
 
1 hour later…
12:03 PM
@MichaelGreinecker It was very explicit, look further up in the same conversation.
@MichaelGreinecker Thank you very much!
 
12:26 PM
I wouldn't be be worried.
The real world is full of toxic people.
 
12:43 PM
"Their deep inner dissatisfaction with their lives is the issue, and they will spew their nonsense to anyone willing to listen. The only difference is whose blood pressure is going to be raised because of it. Yours, or someone else’s." The ignore button is a beautiful thing :-)
 
1:25 PM
@skullpatrol I'd gladly hit the ignore button, if not for the problem of allowing some innocent other people to come to harm because of my inaction.
 
2:18 PM
"buyer beware"
 
2:32 PM
This is the end of the innocence
Who knows how long this will last
Now we've come so far, so fast
 
2:51 PM
nobody is actually "coming to harm," they will spew their nonsense to anyone willing to listen.
 
@skullpatrol It depends? One could argue that scammers on the internet are not directly harming anyone, since people had to go online in the first place to see their scams. Though I consider gullible people to be a bit responsible for getting duped, I still consider the scammers more culpable.
 

« first day (1096 days earlier)