2
$\begingroup$

About 30 hours ago, I posted an item on meta that was not here 12 hours later. What's going on?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's been deleted. See answer by the relevant mod. $\endgroup$ – Sklivvz Jun 29 '13 at 13:57
  • $\begingroup$ Was any attempt made to inform me of the deletion? It didn't appear in notifications or elsewhere. $\endgroup$ – Michael Hardy Jun 29 '13 at 14:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Skliwz: could you perhaps edit the link in your comment so that the title is not visible. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jun 29 '13 at 14:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I can't verify it, but you should have been notified of the answer. $\endgroup$ – Sklivvz Jun 29 '13 at 14:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MichaelHardy If a moderator leaves a comment before deleting a post, the poster is guaranteed to be notified about it. This is one of the changes that came in with SE 2.0, and I let the moderator know so that they're better able to prevent confusion like this in the future. $\endgroup$ – Adam Lear Jun 29 '13 at 15:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ A message was sent off site immediately after deletion but apparently did not reach user Michael Hardy. $\endgroup$ – François G. Dorais Jun 29 '13 at 16:27
  • $\begingroup$ OK, I've found out that a notice was sent to an email address that I've recently looked at only every two or three days. I don't know how moderation works on this site, other than the crowd-sourced forms of it. $\endgroup$ – Michael Hardy Jun 29 '13 at 17:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MichaelHardy there are six moderators for the site, this was also so before the change, you can find the names of the moderators on various places on the site. The are marked by a diamond see François G. Dorais. But note that now there are also general network-wide moerators also marked by a diamond. But mainly the relevant ones for this site are those behind the link I give. you can contact them by email via writing to moderators "at" MO.net with MO expanded in the obvious way. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jun 29 '13 at 19:15
9
$\begingroup$

Okay, my fault apparently.

I deleted the post and immediately contacted Michael to discuss it offline. I then hopped on a plane to Australia and missed the discussion here.

François recommended to me that I use the new 2.0 feature for contacting users through the site rather than by email. At this point I don't like the idea very much, but could be persuaded.

Our previous policy had been that if you don't provide identifying information in your profile (e.g. a real name or email address), you shouldn't expect particularly much patience from the moderators!

The new "internal" notification mechanism in fact makes it easier for users to remain pseudymous, which I think is a bad thing! I would prefer to stick to our old ways --- you're welcome to be pseudonymous or uncontactable, but only on your best behaviour!

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ The difficulty of getting a pseudonymous email address is so minimal that I would say regarding the difficulty of being pseudonymous it does not change anything, except if out of principle you would not write to such an address, which however was never said like this. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jun 29 '13 at 22:42
  • $\begingroup$ We always wrote to whatever address was supplied, if any. The issue is mostly with users who do not supply contact info of any kind, or users who supply invalid contact info. $\endgroup$ – François G. Dorais Jun 29 '13 at 22:53
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @FrançoisG.Dorais: thank you for the information/confirmation. Incidentally, to celebrate the upgrade, I finally added an email address in my profile (I assume visible to moderators, if not it'd be a bit unclear where to put it). So I take it I can now behave worse than before. ;-) $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jun 29 '13 at 23:08
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @quid, we noticed... >:) $\endgroup$ – François G. Dorais Jun 29 '13 at 23:17
  • $\begingroup$ @FrançoisG.Dorais: while I just got into some complicated exchange, I did mean this behaving worse as a pure joke. I hope this was clear. (I am now sort of unsure in categorizing your final comment. The emoticon being a bit confusing.) $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jun 30 '13 at 0:39
  • $\begingroup$ @quid: Sorry. Honestly, I don't know how to use emoticons. This one was suggested by a younger friend after I asked how to type an humoristic "evil grin" as a response. I shouldn't have tried so hard... $\endgroup$ – François G. Dorais Jun 30 '13 at 0:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Will: sending us an email is still the best way to reach us. $\endgroup$ – François G. Dorais Jun 30 '13 at 0:51
  • $\begingroup$ @FrançoisG.Dorais: me neither, and I had nobody to ask and the info on the internet was a bit inconclusive, yes I found 'evil' but then maybe this is rather also 'angry'. Completely inadvertently it seems I almost fulfilled my joke. Sorry! I will write a bit less in the days to come. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jun 30 '13 at 1:03
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ You're definitely welcome to use whatever moderation techniques you think work best for you guys, but I just want to note one advantage of using the internal messaging system - it leaves a record on the site that is easy to find and review later. This would come in handy if, say, more moderators joined the team down the road since they'd right away be aware of previous discussions with a user. $\endgroup$ – Adam Lear Jun 30 '13 at 19:33
  • $\begingroup$ Much like the First Men of the North, one of the sayings passed from father to son in the MO moderators society is "Our way is the old way". $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jul 5 '15 at 4:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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