-2

This is in regards to this question: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/82519/why-command-line-is-faster-than-gui-closed

Please read the previous version of my question also, as the second revision will make more sense that way.

A moderator mentioned the locking "is because of [my] comments on answers."

My question:

Which comments on which answers is the mod referring to?

Everything has been vague so far (even the current answer below), and I still have no idea which user I was misbehaving toward, as was mentioned to me.

  • 1
    I don't like this. Reformat this as a general discussion about a certain class of moderation, or I'm deleting it. See the moderation discussion in the first 5 minutes of blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/06/se-podcast-07 – Jeff Atwood Jun 9 '11 at 3:50
  • @Jeff: I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "certain class of moderation" (elaboration appreciated... reading that page right now though)... which aspect of it would you like me to edit? (i.e. are you referring to the fact that I mentioned a specific mod?) – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 3:57
  • @Jeff: Read the page but still didn't get what you meant; mind explaining? – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 4:26
  • @mehr needs to be rebuilt as less of a confrontation between you and one specific moderator, and a question about general moderation techniques for this broad class of events. Protip: if you EVER mention another user by name, You Are Doing It Wrong. – Jeff Atwood Jun 9 '11 at 4:36
  • @Jeff: I understand the first part of your first sentence, but regarding the second part of the first sentence: How/where can I possibly ask about this particular post then? Is chat a better place for it? (Regarding the tip: Thanks for the tip, but I thought I'd seen this happen before regarding mods on meta... I'll try to avoid it I guess) – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 4:38
  • 2
    @Jeff I'm a bit confused as well. If a user has an issue with their post being closed, are they supposed to dispute it by opening up a general discussion? – Adam Lear Jun 9 '11 at 4:48
  • @Jeff: For your (and the mod's) sake, I tried my best and edited the question to take out the name. But it makes absolutely no sense to me to avoid referring to the particular question... AFAIK, that's the whole point of meta -- that the community decides what is wrong and what is right, not the moderators. AmIDoingItWrong? – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 4:53
  • @anna they do not dispute it by invoking the name of the moderator. "My question was closed because Joe Smith, the moderator, doesn't understand it." I urge you to listen to the first 5 minutes of the podcast, please. – Jeff Atwood Jun 9 '11 at 4:58
  • @Jeff: Is the question better now? (BTW, it seems like the podcast was made today... was it made in response to this?) – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 5:01
  • @Jeff: Not really trying to get on your nerves, but it seems like someone mentioned your name (and someone else's) and you didn't really care... why was it different here? – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 5:03
  • @Jeff Fair enough. The podcast's on my playlist for tomorrow already. Thanks. – Adam Lear Jun 9 '11 at 5:05
  • @Jeff, @Anna: Btw, if you happen to have any answers to my question, it should go without saying that I'm interested... – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 5:43
  • 2
    I think what Jeff is objecting to (not to try to put words into his mouth) is an attack directed at a single person posed as a question. On the contrary, I see this as a good faith attempt by the OP to understand and learn from a specific moderation decision. Referencing the specific moderation decision would be difficult without referencing the moderator. – Rein Henrichs Jun 10 '11 at 0:16
6

I would like to take the time to fully detail my actions involved with your question. However, given I just got in the middle of something I can't take the time to do so at the moment.

In a (very brief) nutshell:

  • You asked "Why is Command Line faster then GUI"
  • You received several excellent answers and even more helpful comments
  • This topic is not "taboo" in any fashion.
  • Comment discussions turned into extended fights between you and other members about what your wording of the question meant.
  • You repeatedly edited the question to add "except in cases Foo, Bar, Baz" style exclusions to the original question, diluting it's worth and adding more confusion to what you were really asking.
  • I asked you to clean up your question.
  • You said you would get to it later today.
  • I locked your question.
  • You flagged the question so you could edit it.
  • I unlocked your question.
  • Your edits did little to clean it up.
  • You continued disagreeing with interpretation of other people as to the point of your question.
  • I offered you history as an example of real-world bash usage
  • You decided to not understand what that meant.
  • I replied with a link to the man page.
  • You decided I was being snarky.
  • I closed your question and invited you to try again.
  • You continued to comment reply en masse to both me and other posters.
  • You accepted an answer.
  • I locked your question.

In attempting to justify keeping your question open I did delete quite a few discussion threads in the comment. Had I foreseen the eventual end of the question as it did I would have left those and simply closed it.

  • 3
    For what it's worth, I kept half an eye on the comment threads in that question and I agree with Josh's assessment. At least for the early answers, I saw more than one comment from the OP to the effect of "okay, but I don't use things that way". The question is in need of focusing, especially cause it's a potentially volatile subject since people are quite attached to the way they work. – Adam Lear Jun 8 '11 at 20:22
  • @Josh: Take note of the fact that you deleted my comments right before you mentioned history. I had no idea it was an example of real-world bash usage because I had no idea what you were replying to, and you didn't explain anything in your comment, making me look stupid. Isn't that a bit snarky? – Mehrdad Jun 8 '11 at 20:23
  • @Anna: I'm not so much arguing that the question was perfectly worded (if it was, I wouldn't have revised it), but I'm more ticked off at the fact that Josh suddenly decided to close/lock things twice at his own accord, with little indication that the rest of the members wanted it to happen (I only saw a single close vote) -- and he refused to be specific about which comments on the answers he was referring to. (He's busy right now, but when he gets the chance, I'd still like to know which other answers and which comments he was referring to.) – Mehrdad Jun 8 '11 at 20:24
  • @Mehrdada: I wasn't aware I had deleted that comment, mostly I deleted threads of comments. If that particular one was in there and that cause confusion I apologize. – Josh K Jun 8 '11 at 20:25
  • @Josh: Actually, it was the other way around: you locked my question, THEN I accepted an answer. – Mehrdad Jun 8 '11 at 20:25
  • @Josh: Yeah unfortunately you had, that's why I kept on saying I have no idea what you're talking about. I wasn't deciding to be obvlivious to what you were saying, but after so many comments with so many users I just had no idea what the heck that link to history was supposed to mean, and what it was replying to. You decided to not understand what that meant is just plainly ignoring what had happened with regards to the deletions. :\ – Mehrdad Jun 8 '11 at 20:26
  • 4
    @Mehrdad Moderators routinely lock/close questions that start getting out of hand and become overly argumentative. – Adam Lear Jun 8 '11 at 20:27
  • @Anna: I don't mind that -- what I do mind is if they don't explain what exactly is becoming argumentative. Saying that I'm "fighting" with the other users or that my "other comments" on the "other answers" are argumentative is really vague and I have no idea what he's referring to, especially because I indeed praised some of the answers. That's my real issue here. – Mehrdad Jun 8 '11 at 20:32
  • @Dori: Oh wow, seems to have been my confusion then -- I answered it after he mentioned that he's closing it (I was afraid I couldn't accept it or something after that) and refreshed a bit later, and saw it was locked. I guess it was locked in that delay then? Not sure, but either way, my bad. – Mehrdad Jun 8 '11 at 23:14
  • 1
    I watched that question throughout the day as well and think Josh's actions were appropriate for a question that was getting out of hand. ...But my opinion may not count since I was the "single close vote" other than Josh :) – Walter Jun 9 '11 at 1:06
  • @Walter: Haha I think your opinion does count, no worries -- although I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this as well. :) If indeed it was getting out of hand, then okay, his actions were appropriate. But I still haven't received an explanation from him (or anyone else) as to which comments he thinks were "getting out of hand", that's my issue here. The statement "it was getting out of hand" isn't really helpful, because unless I know what part of my behavior it's referring to, it's probably going to happen again (not on purpose obviously). – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 1:12
  • @Walter: Since Josh hasn't answered yet and I'm still curious, would you mind if I ask: which of my comments (just an example or two) did you think were "getting out of hand"? I'm re-reading the comments there, and the only comments I see that I could say were "getting out of hand" are my convos with Josh... I can't find anything else. – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 1:23
  • @Josh: Are you planning on ever responding? (Not in a hurry, but I'd like to know if I'm going to get a response.) – Mehrdad Jun 10 '11 at 5:44
4

This question is yet another variation of

Why should I use vim for daily tasks, as opposed to emacs? Someone told me it's faster, but I don't understand why/when/how. Please provide examples of the daily tasks!

Or if you prefer

Why should I use choose vanilla ice cream for my daily ice cream break, as opposed to chocolate? Someone told me it's more delicious, but I don't understand why/when/how. Please provide examples of your ice cream breaks!

This question simply isn't appropriate for the site, per

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/faq#dontask

And specifically

your answer is provided along with the question, and you expect more answers: “I use ______ for ______, what do you use?”

So if the question went off the rails, that's not surprising, since it wasn't a good fit from the beginning.

(I don't think we can interpret your question as "I would like others to explain the benefits of the command line to me"; even if we could, I wouldn't support such a question under the emerging too trivial / general reference close reason. That's like a truck driver asking about the benefits of steering wheels and gas pedals.)

  • That certainly tells me why the question was closed (+1 for the first example -- it couldn't make more sense), but it doesn't answer my question here at all. My question here was about where I was getting in "extended fights between myself and the other members", and I still have no idea which ones of my comments that's referring to -- a couple of links (from you or anyone else) would be appreciated, and useful for the future. – Mehrdad Jun 9 '11 at 6:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .