Being insulted by SSimon is an endorsement as far as I'm concerned :D

:)

I have come to this chatroom in order to try and find out what @SSimon alleges is a "lie" or "false claim" by @Wrzlprmft ... I suppose it is too much to hope for, that SSimon has actually backed up wild statements with something resembling coherent and accurate explanation? Anyone know what (s?)he is referring to?

@MassimoOrtolano perhaps ssimon is mad that it seems that wrzlprmft is just running in the election to prop up your nomination?

wrzlprmft said something that would suggest that

and if that were true, it seems a bit unethical - artificially propping up a candidate

just a guess - I don't see anything else in his nomination that was alarming

if you were to win - and it seems you'd have plenty of people voting for you - you should do it on your own, without some form of trickery

@E.P.: Yes, my candidacy is just a subversive campaign to draw more attention to Massimo Ortolano’s. (Fixed it; thanks.) – Wrzlprmft Mar 8 at 12:59

^ not really sure what that comment is all about

if there's a joke in that comment, it is not at all obvious -- and risks being misinterpreted by others who may not have a similar sense of humor

@YemonChoi consider the comment above ^

@D.Hutchinson: that seems like an obvious joke to me - I assumed Wrzlprmft accidentally copied MassimoOrtolano's name along with the questions when filling out the questionnaire.

I'm not sure how running in an election could prop up anyone else.

that could happen - run in an election, cast doubt on themselves by saying that their moderator duties on other SE sites are a bit heavy, etc., to throw the election

but if that comment was an obvious joke - and if by some chance that comment was what ssimon was bothered by, someone should bring it up to him that it was a joke

But I highly doubt that there is any relation to SSimon's accusations, which I think he started throwing around before Wrzlprmft even announced his candidacy.

I see

I'm more inclined to think SSimon was upset that Wrzlprmft compared his comment to student elections

but anyway I've had SSimon ignored for quite a while already, as I find his comments to be irrational in general

no point in trying to bend over backwards to come up with a good explanation

I see

yeah, it's ultimately up to him to argue his case, which he still hasn't done

hi @CaptainBohemian :)

@nengel @D.Hutchinson Almost. In the question for an exemplary Meta post, I accidentally linked to Massimo’s instead of mine (which is evidenced in the history of my answer). Anyway, I deleted the comment in question – not to obfuscate my motives but to avoid confusion as the comment it was referring to has been deleted.

@Wrzlprmft ok, thanks for clarifying

@D.Hutchinson Anyway, I swear I haven't offered @Wrzlprmft to pay him pints of beer next time I go to Germany if he supported me :-)

@ff524 In fact, I'd go a bit further and say that SSimon's wild accusations have been useful, for once. For 3 out of 4 candidates (I feel padawan has been treated a bit unfairly, but ech, I do understand opposing all candidates is a bit of a tall order), SSimon expertly tested their response to accusations and/or other behaviour that can be interpreted as hostile.

Needless to say, they all passed. This can be interpreted as hilarious. (at least ironic, as SSimon has helped the candidates (at least, I think they gain a net positive) by opposing them!) However, this is actually quite serious. Note that while all replies have been generally acceptable behaviour for a mod (at least, according to me), the replies are a bit different.

@MassimoOrtolano Because Germany is so small that we would inevitably run into each other, if you were visiting …

I'll try to give a brief description of their reply. @candidates (this includes padawan), please correct me when what follows is either factually inaccurate (due to me not seeing/remembering deleted things) or whether you would have chosen to behave differently, if you'd be given a second chance (which you will get (perhaps with a different person) if you actually become elected ;) ).

@Wrzlprmft didn't or did only minimally reply, merely asking for clarification. That said, Wrzlprmft did also reply to an accusation with someone else as the subject. This tells me that this candidate is not afraid to engage with potentially troublesome comments and does not see the need to immediately cut the conversation short unless it is obvious nothing can be gained from it.

@MassimoOrtolano simply ignored the trouble (or at least someone had the replies deleted).

Finally, @Fomite made a polite (enough) reply to indicate that the discussion should stop.

While perhaps the candidates would behave differently when wielding the banhammer, as that gives more options, I think their behaviour here is interesting nonetheless. At least, to a relative outsider like me.

@Discretelizard When I saw SSimon's comment about me being biased, there was already a comment asking for examples. Since SSimon didn't provide any , I ignored the accusation (no comments deleted), especially after reading that other candidates were being similarly accused. Of course, I'd happy to reply to specific examples.

@Discretelizard: First of all I would like to note that the situations are not as identical as they may seem at first glance. In Massimo Ortolano’s case, there were two comments by other users asking SSimon for evidence quite quickly. I was the only one accused in the (more prominent) questionnaire.

@Wrzlprmft Fair enough, I had a feeling that most difference in reply were due slightly different situations, ah well.

@Discretelizard Wrzlprmft did also reply to an accusation with someone else as the subject – That’s not exactly correct; I replied to praise for another candidate.

@Discretelizard Also I replied to the comment under my nomination (asking for clarification) but deleted it after I was confident that SSimon had read it and Tobias Kildetoft posted his comment.

Hmm, this turns out to be a rather weak experiment after all. Ah well, I'll simply add some edgy comments myself to candidate nominations in the next election ;) . No, I'm not serious here. I'm not that evil.

@Discretelizard As for your main question: The situation of an election is quite special, as it is the only place on this site where ad-personam arguments are acceptable (because, well, it is about the person). This makes it more difficult to distinguish between honest concerns and trolling and also more difficult to direct the discussion in a constructive direction (though our community has done a great job by consistently asking for clarification and not just piling up on it).

For example, if somebody accused my moderation of being biased or otherwise flawed without any specifics, I would ask them to ask on Meta and make it about the decisions (instead of the person). If they just continue posting such accusations after that, the moderator team would have a good point for deleting such comments (I would avoid deleting them myself though) or even suspending the user. If the user posts on Meta without providing evidence, the community can downvote or close as unclear.

Outside the context of an election, I would consider SSimon’s behaviour actionable, as it seems to intend provocation and violates several aspects of be nice. So, I would behave differently, however, not because my attitude and powers have changed, but because the situation is inevitably different.

@YemonChoi the comparison with student elections.

@Fomite but you are, you are only representing one steady point, view on academia. there is lack of diversity of opinion, you dont understand other culture., the example was your report of me to moderators, I dont understand why you claim I didnt provide you evidence.

@SSimon Thank you for being more specific. So, please let me try to explain this comment to you: My understanding of your comment on Padawan’s election is this: You wish for a moderator to address some problems you perceive in the academic world, namely an imbalance between different classes of the academic population. I consider such a stance flawed because a moderator of this site simply does not have the power to address these issues.

In short: Moderators are elected to solve problems of Academia SE, not of academia (mind the capitalisation).

@SSimon If Fomite reported you to the moderators for some reason and you got to know about this somehow (keeping in mind that flags and similar are usually anonymous), then this potential evidence is at best known to six persons: Fomite, the moderators, and you. For everybody else, this information is not really useful. Can you provide a link to a post where Fomite was rude to you or exhibits detachment from reality (both of which are claims you made under his nomination)?

@Wrzlprmft the comment was taken out of context and it is not related to padawan or you, It was an explanation to asesmilles user. it was misused by you in such a way that is really disrespectful.

@Wrzlprmft well yes, I would know because it was personal to me and Formite

@SSimon I have just read the context again, and I do not see how it would change the interpretation. Anyway, if I (and apparently not only I) misunderstood your comment, please clarify what you actually meant.

@SSimon So your answer to my question “Can you provide a link …?” is no?

@Wrzlprmft are you moderator yet? this is matter between fomite and me, why you want to be involved? @ff524 I would like to know if new moderator will see my ip address?

@Wrzlprmft the comment referred to asimell question to me, nothing related to your insinuation and padawan nomination, stop taking it out of context

As an outsider, I am still trying to figure out why @SSimon has a problem with @Wrzlprmft... But by this discussion even @Wrzlprmft doesn't know what is the problem. Well, I thought that the problem was with @Wrzlprmft due to some comments, now I'm seeing that the problem is with @Fomite. I'm lost. @SSimon would you summarize the problem, please? :)

@TheDoctor SSimon has problems with three of the candidates. No one else seems to know what these are.

@SSimon Moderators are bound by a moderator agreement which requires us to follow the SE privacy policy.

@SSimon yes, moderators can see users' IP addresses for moderation purposes

@SSimon this is matter between fomite and me – If you do not wish others to participate in the discussion about this issue, why did you drag it to one of the most prominent places on this site? If you make accusations under an election nomination, it is only natural that somebody will ask you to back them up.

@SSimon I still do not know where I insinuated something or misrepresented something by taking it out of context. And even if I did, I do not know how this makes me a liar.

For reference, and because insinuations and veiled references are unproductive, I suspect the post SSimon is referencing is this one: academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99437/…

@Fomite there are also, now deleted, comments on that post without which it is difficult to understand the full story.

@StrongBad Indeed. But it's one step closer to actually having context.

Out of curiosity, do we also know who gets 2nd, 3rd and 4th place after this election is over? Or do we only know who is elected as the moderator?

@Hosea There will be a detailed rundown of the evaluation (like this) and you get to download the (anonymised) data.

@Wrzlprmft Nice. Thanks!

@ArnaudD. oh, okay! Thank you! So we are all lost together.. nice! :)

I kinda also think that this drama by ssimon was unintentionally well-timed, as a test for the nominees, and it's clear that they handled it pretty well. Fomite and Massimo can be a bit more in-your-face and forceful with their answers and comments, compared with wrzlprmft's more diplomatic answers. The difference is likely due to wrzlprmft's experience as a moderator on other SE sites.

This isn't to say that Fomite and Massimo couldn't learn the ropes of SE diamond moderation, but they'd have to be more mindful of an international audience, and certain ways of saying things can be considered rude by people from different cultures.