Cross link: Nathaniel is also resigning for roughly the same reasons.

Thanks Caleb, for this post, as well as your long service here that helped make this place such a great place to learn.

Thank you for bringing some clarity to this difficult series of events.

Well said, sir. Just FYI, you might want to get a non-leaving mod to feature this, as Tim Post has been going around and un-featuring any self-featured resignations

I need to add, I'm an atheist and I was allowed to post here. This is in large part due to the original mod team. Thanks Caleb!

I could understand SE requiring moderators to not disengage with users over pronouns, as we are held to a different standard, but to expect us to identify a user that has disengaged is insane.

@StrongBad - Caleb claims that for a moderator, sticking to "proper names" (which I take to be the username) instead of using a pronoun is to be considered an insult by the moderator to the user. Is that also an acceptable standard for moderators?

@davidbak I am guessing I am going to have a very different view from you and this is your community and I don't want to step on toes. As much as I disagree with some of what Caleb said, I wanted to point out the common ground.

@StrongBad - I probably worded my comment wrong - but I wasn't attacking you or anything. I just wanted to know if you could explain that part of the guidance which is you can't even just sidestep the issue by using a proper name. To me, the way I grew up, refering to someone using a name instead of a pronoun is more respectful.

@Caleb Thanks for your service to this community and for shedding light on this issues surrounding what's been going on! As a side note, there are a few typos you might want to correct in your post. Since this is meta, I can't suggest an edit. Feel free to delete my comment after you've read it: 'region' should be 'religion,' 'pubic' should be 'public,' 'judgement' should be 'judgment,' 'poor' should be 'pour,' and 'an is' should be 'and is.'

@Aza, no disrespect intended. I only disagree that you should have to assert anything by definition. Reality doesn't bend to one's definitions; we define things according to reality. Not here to argue that point, though, as you've declined to engage it. But you did neglect to address the question of respect at the end of my comment. Is it disrespectful to tell me I can't define myself as someone who sees others as being the gender conforming to their biology? If not, then why? if so, then why is SE being disrespectful? It is a valid question for those marginalized for their objectivity.

@TerryLewis you're not being "compelled to think" anything, you're being compelled to do someone the basic human decency of using some words they prefer you use to refer to them. You can continue to think whatever you want, but stackoverflow isn't the place to challenge someone on their self-identification.

@mbrig, "Above all, be honest. If you see misinformation, vote it down. Add comments indicating what, specifically, is wrong." (SE, "Our Model") How can I be honest and follow your suggestion? Shall I deny what I believe to be true to spare another the discomfort of knowing that I think differently than them? What of the discomfort caused to me because I'm forced to say what I do not hold true? I am responsible for the words I write; they are not just "some words", they are my words. If they do not represent me honestly, then I am a liar, and not to be trusted.