-7
$\begingroup$

I confess to being mystified as to why some users (three of them, so far) have down-voted this posting. This does not seem to be explained by the vulgarity of manner that is not infrequently seen in all of these "meta" pages.

Is it impossible for any who disagree about this to express their objections verbally? Do they assume it's obvious what their reasons are for objecting? Not only is it not obvious, but I don't even know any semi-plausible wild guesses?

$\endgroup$
15
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Perhaps users thought it pointless pedantry to make a post on punctuational prescriptivism? I cannot guarantee I am consistent in punctuating more baroque display arrangements, and given that I use lots of commutative diagrams, there comes a point where the line between what is part of a sentence, written in mathematical notation, and what is a figure is blurred, and there's no good choice. Further, this is the internet, and I'm mostly happy if users remember to use punctuation and capitalisation at all, just in their prose (though some people I know just don't do this, ever). $\endgroup$
    – David Roberts Mod
    Nov 7 at 1:39
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ It's clearly not impossible for them to write about their objections (I'm not sure about "verbally"—do you want them to visit you and tell you about why they downvoted you, using their vocal chords?), but people are not obligated by the system to justify their voting. Emotive phrases like "aesthetically pleasing" and "hideous" in your post opens up the discussion to be based on taste, so why is it surprising when people silently indicate their disagreement? $\endgroup$
    – David Roberts Mod
    Nov 7 at 1:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DavidRoberts : I never said in that post that anything in particular is "aesthetically pleasing" or "hideous"; rather I said that people often evaluate things that way. Does anyone disagree with that? Do you? As for "surprising", I didn't find it surprising because ten years' experience show it to be commonplace around here, but I find it puzzling when people, over a period of ten years, exhibit a particular pattern of evaluating things and being unwilling explain in words when asked politely to explain their positions, by someone with a reputation of over 200000. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 7 at 3:41
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Michael: I'm confused. Who has reputation over 200,000? You only have 10,943 at the time of this comment. Math.SE and MO are distinct communities. What holds for the one need not hold for the other. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Nov 7 at 8:45
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ "If you look at something in one font and the same thing in another font and think that one looks aesthetically pleasing and the other hideous"<--- you introduced value judgements based on aesthetic, making it explicitly about personal taste in the abstract, and by implication the specific example you gave. If you have a beef about math.SE, please take it up there. $\endgroup$
    – David Roberts Mod
    Nov 7 at 10:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DavidRoberts : "Verbally" means using words. Such as those I am typing in this comment. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 7 at 15:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DavidRoberts : This is out-of-context quoting. If you read what I said, you will see that it does not depend on my personal tastes or anybody else's. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 7 at 15:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DavidRoberts : I have no idea what makes you think this is about a beef with stackexchange. That does not resemble what I wrote. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 7 at 15:11
  • $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila : I was referring to a different stackexchange community. This situation prevails in all stackexchange communities. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 7 at 15:23
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidRoberts : If those who down-voted that posting misunderstood my comments in the same way that you did, is there a reason why they cannot say that that is what their objection is? $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 7 at 15:26
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ @Michael, simply put, don't. This is not the place to air your issues with other communities. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Nov 7 at 15:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Your older question on this meta site seems related: What are reasons for allowing anonymous voting? $\endgroup$
    – Martin Sleziak
    Nov 13 at 7:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila Simply put, I did not do so. As you can see, I carefully avoided doing so. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 13 at 21:58
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Michael: This is not going to be a discussion. This is me telling you how your actions are being perceived by myself, with my moderator hat firmly on, as well as others in this community. The fact that you are complaining about "all stackexchange communities", and referring specifically to the one where you have only 200k points, you are in fact airing your grievances. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Nov 13 at 22:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila : Can you answer the question? Is there a reason why this question should not be asked and answered here? I asked the question because (and you must take this absolutely literally or you will fail entirely to understand it) I DO NOT know the answer and I wanted to find out the answer. And people, perhaps including you, are acting as if there's something wrong with asking such a question. $\endgroup$
    – Michael Hardy
    Nov 15 at 17:50

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .