Math Mods' Office - 2020-01-30

Bellatrix

00:22

@quid

quid

@Bellatrix hello

Bellatrix

16:10

@quid I have to say something about this math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/31193/… because a user said in comments, something really insulting

quid

17:12

@Bellatrix please go ahead. Or do you prefer a mod-restrcited room?

Bellatrix

@quid idk quid but this user said that I saw Bill Dubuque as a God. Then edited their comment but I took a pic so that you can see

That's one fo the worst things a user has said to me

I don't think this user knows the meaning of God

We all know that Bill is an amazing mathematician and his teaching skills to users are awesome but that's it, I don't even know Bill. So how this user dare to say something like that? that I see him as God

@quid I've just found the pic, the exact words were "..you look Bill as a God.."

Roddy MacPhee

17:35

God
/ɡäd/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: God; noun: god; plural noun: gods; plural noun: the gods
1.
(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
2.
(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.
"a moon god"
Similar:
deity
goddess
divine being
celestial being
supreme being
divinity
immortal
creator
demiurge
godhead
daemon
numen

English words typically don't have just one meaning.

Bellatrix

@RoddyMacPhee Thanks, but it turns out I know exactly the meaning of God

quid

@Bellatrix I am sorry for the offense caused. I am sure it was not intended. To many it is just a way to talk, to express that you seem to hold Bill in high esteem, which appears to be the case. Arguably it is better to steer clear of usage of religious references.

Put differently it is the 3 meaning in what @Roddy quoted.

2

amWhy

Context, dear @Bellatrix. You missed the context of the conversation. And you said something really insulting to me: " "It's very sad to see you back". And you don't even know me. You echoed another users' words. That's one of the worst things that anyone has said to me, @quid!

Bellatrix

17:50

@quid I don't see Bill as none of the definitions that Roddy's posted, and it's highly insulting that a user claim that to me

@amWhy when did I say AmWhy: it's very sad to see you back?

@amWhy you did replied to my comment: saying that "Bellatrix the feeling is mututal" and you then deleted it

Bill Dubuque

@quid Please review what was actually written there, vs. amWhy's distortion of the facts. No one said anything about "God" other than amWhy. No one said anything about "pet peeves" other than amWhy. She continues to attempt to put her insulting words into the mouths of other users. This is highly offensive and should not be allowed. There were no problems in CRUDE for a long time until amWhy recently returned and picked up right where she left off with her personal attacks.

amWhy

18:11

Indeed, please @quid, read *what was actually written there, and in @Ballatrix's meta post. We all, Bill, me, Bellatrix, got out of hand. The deleted comments were deleted for a reason, and each of the three of us was suspended from chat for twelve hours. Also, Bellartrix's subsequent meta post has since been deleted. I accept some responsibility; it's just sad that the other two can't/won't.

@Bellatrix You said it on CRUDE, and you repeated, recalled that you said it to me in your meta post, (see your link to it): "Then I said "It's very sad to see you back" (without pings)."

quid

18:39

@Bellatrix you said "an amazing mathematician and his teaching skills to users are awesome" I think can reasonably paraphrased this as the person thus referred to being considered as admired or influentlial. Anyway that is likely a tangent. Regardless, the exact formulation and the intent were not ideal and @amWhy does acknowledge this. I find your remark concerning the "it's sad" confusing. It seems clear you said it. is the contention about whether it was said to amWhy?

2

Ping or not, this seems also fairly established.

quid

18:57

@BillDubuque I tried to review the conversations as best as I could. The interaction you both had escalated. I recommend to try to avoid this by disengaging or deescalating earlier. Indeed, at the very start you both seemed on a good way. I don't quite get how Bellatrix even got involved into it all.

Bill Dubuque

19:08

OOps, above was supped to be @quid

amWhy

@quid Please re-encourage Bill to de-escalate. His comment needs to be deleted. As you said "I recommend to try to avoid this by disengaging or deescalating earlier."

Bill Dubuque

Sigh, I didn't mean to overwrite my prior comment. I will try to reconstruct it....

@quid I find it unfathomable that you think that anyone besides amWhy deserves any blame here. Can you see everything she wrote? Bellatrix got caught up in it because they mistakenly misread her attacks (hard to follow for non-native speakers). I've had to suffer these incessant personal attacks for years ever since I exposed the many tens of thousands of cheating rep from her huge voting ring. Please get her to stop (for the health of the site).

amWhy

19:24

@quid I have had to suffer Bill's incessant personal attacks for years. He is just as as much responsible for yesterday, given his vitriol, which he spews against many, many users, current and past. I asked him to show restraint with his rants here against Yves, and in response, he lashed out at me. I will not engage with Bill, due to his vitriol. I'll say no more. Feel free to delete this; but I cannot remain silent while he's continues to bring up unrelated and irrelevant factors...

...to try to discredit me.

Bill Dubuque

For the record. "rants againts Yves" are figments of amWhy's overactive imagination. There was merely a single post pointed out in CRUDE where I asked for others to help explain the error. Go read it to see how she distorts the truth.

Here is said CRUDE post.

amWhy

@Bill But my being concerned about your sequence of seven consecutive comments ranting about the named user unleashed you yesterday, and further more today. Learn to argue without making things so personal, if you can.

Else, you are not trusted to be capable of civil discourse, in which case, I will simply ignore you.

Can I speak with you privately, @quid?

@Bill, your link does NOT reveal your vitriol from yesterday. Please, @quid, see what was deleted yesterday.

Bill Dubuque

@amWhy I have no idea what you are talking about. Please - for once - stop making wild guesses about the motives of other users who you clearly don't understand well. That I pointed out one erroneous post of a user does not support your ridiculous claim that i have a longstanding "pet peeve" about such user (and your consequent vitriol based on such). There is no evidence at all to support your claims, as a SEDE query easily verifies.

Yes, quid, please do examine the full record so you can debunk all the false and misleading claims made by amWhy.

amWhy

@Bill, you forget that mods can see the vitriol you posted yesterday, before mods deleted it. Same target, same user. I will say no more.

Bill Dubuque

19:53

@amWhy (Politely) pointing out that you seem to have confused some facts, and that you were putting your words into the mouth of others, is not "vitriol" by any means. Please look up the meaning of the word.

Bill Dubuque

20:43

@quid See also the GENTLE thread starting here just prior to her blowup in CRUDE, where amWhy bizarrely wrote "BD is now angry with me, he'll seek revenge and cast a couple of votes" - which puzzled everyone there. This is surely one of the most bizarre inferences I've ever seen. It seems she thinks that my undeletion votes there were some sort of "revenge" against her.

I gave up trying to make sense of her irrational personal attacks years ago. But it seems that this is part of what sparked her later blowup in CRUDE. I wish I could say I've seen stranger things, but this takes the cake....

Roddy MacPhee

21:07

There's a proper type of cruel, and doesn't involve sulfuric acid, or glass.

quid

23:41

@BillDubuque it is hard to know if I can see everything. But there is no known unknown. I am not sure it is productive to dissect the escalation. I'll just say that it seems to have all started with a slight against Jyrki.

Bill Dubuque

@quid I don't believe that has anything at all to do with it. But if you can't see the deleted posts I guess you will never know.

quid

@BillDubuque I think I can see them.

Bill Dubuque

Btw, in case you didn't know, Jyrki himself often mentions his prior rants (and often apologizes for them too)

quid

@BillDubuque well, there is a difference still. Anyway, I am not here to assign blame.

Bill Dubuque

Things would have never gotten so far out of hand if prior mod teams had prevented many such rants (not only those of J). But that's water under the bridge....

quid

23:45

@BillDubuque maybe. Maybe also other rants.

I mean you were taken to task for having called for the deletion of poor content.

Bill Dubuque

Yes, there was much nonconstructive stuff in the old days. Hopefully we will not repeat the mistakes of the past. As I said on GENTLE, I'm willing to write it off as vestiges of past grudges in the hope that is the last bit of steam she lets off

quid

Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind and all.

Bill Dubuque

@quid Honestly I have no clue what sparked it all. Whicjh is unfortunate since it would be nice to be able to say: oh, it was simply a misunderstanding etc....

But I can't make any sense at all of the claims about revenge, pet peeves, etc.

I know enough about all the strange history and politics that usually I can make an educated guess. But here I am completely dumbfounded. It came completely out of the blue.

quid

@BillDubuque I assume the pet peeve is the induction thing. I am not sure if this came up already more frequently.

Transcript for

$Mathematics$ Math Mods' Office