@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.
@MichaelGreinecker - I can be a serial killer and write brilliant answers. user28120's logic is ad hominem. — George Chen1 hour ago
This reveals not only the sheer cheek of this user, and unrepentance for his nasty comments, but also reveals a sheer lack of logical reasoning on his part, because I did not make any ad hominem attack at all. I had voted to delete certain posts that were useless to modern mathematics students, as practically any professional mathematician would agree. I did not even touch other posts of his that are relevant and worth keeping, despite my (of course) dislike of his nasty attitude.
user131753
9:39 AM
@quid: Regarding, the logic of user21820 of which George Chen is (possibly) talking about, I think the following posts may be relevant.
It is certainly not an example of "be nice" best practices, but in long back and forth some get unnerved and it shows a bit. I would not delete it; I might ask the user to express themselves less confrontational next time.
@quid By itself, the comment I quoted above is not that bad. But as I said it reveals that this user never even considered his earlier violence-inciting comments to be wrong.
He of course also fails to mention that professional logicians such as Carl Mummert have essentially said exactly the same thing as I did, three years ago.
@quid If you are talking about the pair of comments here, then I do not understand how it can be misconstrued. If a person yells "Fire! Fire!" in a crowded place, without actually believing that there is a fire, can he later argue that he didn't mean to cause a stampede (with injury or loss of life)?
@quid Yes the focus of Math SE is Mathematics, and that's why we have to remove junk that is useless or harmful to modern mathematics students.
@user21820 no I am not talking about this. Please just ignore that part of the conversation. It is arguably not optimal that we are discussing something in public which does not make sense to most reading. But it's just about a pretty standard comment.
@user21820 yes I agree with this. All I want to say is focus on that aspect; even if the author is the nicest person in the world we should still remove poor content.
@user21820 the deleted comment is a link to another comment, and I was talking to @user170039 about that other comment as they solicited my opinion. In retrospect I should have taken it to a private room to avoid confusion.
@quid I'm sorry I thought your initial remark was directed to me, which caused the confusion.
user131753
@quid You are right. I was talking about the other comment.
user131753
1:18 PM
I don't understand why you are being so easy on this user. What he/she said is clearly offensive and that should be sufficient reason for its deletion (especially note the extremely offensive tone by which he/she calls other users) @quid.
Back to other matters: The pukey green we suffered with yesterday (indicating an accepted answer, or a question for which the asker accepted an answer) is back to our "normal green": meta.stackexchange.com/a/305882/347474
@quid If you haven't read the linked transcript immediately above earlier, you might want to read it to get a better idea about a teeny bit of collusion going on.
Hey, by the way @DanielFischer, or any other mod. I flagged a conversation that I saw getting out of hand. math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/27744/… about the conversation below the answer. I even commented because I thought enough was enough. I flagged the comment thread, and it has since been deleted. So Why was my flag declined, when I flagged that comments be deleted, and they were subsequently deleted?
I think I remember that if a post is deleted by spam flags, the OP receives 100 reputation points penalty. Do moderators have some tools to overturn this?
@MartinSleziak That's a good question. I was troubled an hour or two ago to see like 5 answers of Will's move through the review queue (low quality). I acted to support his posts. But I was troubled by the many attempts to close, or close as spam, some of his answers.
