@amWhy Never heard of SM, and that's what I don't quite like about the fact that people can complain on Meta without most users being aware of their past history, and even if aware being unable to verify to others.

I think it's okay if a user admits a mistake and makes amends, so if SM does so then it makes sense to reconsider his idea of being nicer...

(I personally think people should not think they are entitled, so if posting on this site is expected to follow x,y,z then one should do so if possible. If one thinks the site is not nice, one should not expect people to give answers.)

thanks for your comments, @user21820. I agree.

@user21820 Agree, again. No such admission given, (and no such acknowledgement encouraged by @quid; just a renewed complaint to a mod about being called out on his hypocritical behavior, a mod who, unfortunately, rid the meta post of any link, any quote, pointing out that the user complaining about a not-nice site, has, himself been entirely un-nice himself, to another "new" user.

Is it valuable on this site, to devote one's efforts to try and improve the quality of the site, even in the face of some askers that feel entitled to answers and attack, downvote, post meta questions to defame, such users, and in the face of other users who seek only to gain rep, even despite their answers enabling and encouraging PSQ's, by being ready, 24/7, to answer blatant homework questions, and encouraging "do my homework/assignment/test for me" users to keep coming back, ...

... who whine about "being targeted" and "bullied" "for no reason whatsoever", when virtually no one is targeting them specifically, but rather targeting answers that spoon-feed and enable askers of bare PSQ's with zilch context. In either case, at least I feel that the "big bad wolves" are those who are actually working to make the site persist, in quality, because a quality site persists, where as a low quality site deserves to die on SE, and in the case of MSE ...

... cont... stoops to the lows of Yahoo!Answers, and such homework driven sites. I'm sick of being played like "one of the bad guys"; even more egregious was the about face, from the meta post in which one user denigrated, maligned, and continued to do so in a question post, an experienced user, which should have met with immediate deletion, because it lacked any link or any evidence supporting the rant, but remained a rant, throughout. The about face? Blaming the experienced user ...

... for causing the problem themselves, sympathizing with user making claims they never justified, accusations of no merit.... Said user does not deserve to be "the scapegoat" nor do I, nor does anyone who refrains from the rep-seeking-game, and instead, invests time into the site. No support anywhere for those who try to work on behalf of the site... fewer and fewer such users.... You're all on your own.

@user21820 you may want to try to reconcile this with users voting to delete threads they disapprove of on meta.

@user21820 well, they did. They edit their post and acknowledge the non-optimal initial formulation.

@Why this is not quite correct. See above.

@quid Yes, no need to show me this again. I read it long before commenting here, to @user21820 and to you yourself. That's a pretty empty statement. In fact, you admit to removing significant parts of the post, in order to include only comments related to whatever SM chose to edit. That's getting pretty close to censorship, strictly speaking.

And it basically says it's okay even on main, for a user to post a question, receive hints and suggestions in comments, receive an answer or more answers, then decide they actually want to focus on a different question, so edits it, thus making comments and answers to be seen as "irrelevant", when in fact, a roll back is in order, and a mod, if needed, to intervene and reiterate Do not alter the question after already receiving feedback (comments, answers).

@quid This asker on meta, SM, has a bit of a history of complaining posts on meta, a couple deleted, in fact. And has made a habit of not taking others' input seriously, but rather, insults the feedbackers. You just enabled the user to continue doing the same.

@Why excluding two "poll answers" that got redacted there is exactly one deleted post of that user. This post being a poorly received feature-request that was autodeleted after closure upon poster's request. Yes, some of the contributions of this user to meta were not optimal, but in part I find the reception overly critical.

@Why the problem there is that this is not completely true in my opinion. Yes, an argument can be made in support of each action, but that's not all there is to it.

Users should spread out their feedback evenly and not focalize it too much on a specific user. If a user's behavior is that bad, others will pick up on it too, if not, then not.

@quid, nothing I can say, just like nothing @Did tried to say, seems capable of your self-justifications. Why do some mods have such great difficulty in saying even something as simply as "Perhaps I am mistaken; I interpreted this as that." Or, "It was a tough call. In the end I decided abc instead of xyz because...., perhaps I'm wrong. I can certainly understand that someone else might have seen this differently. Modesty is a sign of a great person.

@Why I obviously was mistaken there.

Still what I meant to do was middle-of-the-road solution, the post must be edited to stay, (between the post can stay as is, and the post must go).

It is genuinely unclear to me how my actions can be seen as showing empathy only for the poster, whom I basically obliged to edit their post.

I also inquired what the advantage would be in deleting the full thread and letting the poster repost the new question. I am still waiting for an answer.

Finally and at the risk of being taken to task for changing the subject, what was the purpose of your edit math.meta.stackexchange.com/posts/27293/revisions

"Users should spread out their feedback evenly and not focalize it too much on a specific user. If a user's behavior is that bad, others will pick up on it too, if not, then not." If you're suggesting I've done that in this case, I'll challenge that characterization. re: decisions made: You know, as far it is now, it's been handled. I just think that reflecting on our actions, is helpful, for all of us who do self-reflect.