The question Why did America only attack Japan with atomic bombs and spare Germany? , which in more than one version speculates that Jews were responsible for a purported decision that Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be nuked but no German cities, hasn't been deleted. The question is both factually ignorant, in that it's fairly common knowledge that Hiroshima happened after victory in Europe, and offensive, as it's linking an ethnic group that suffered genocide with a large-scale killing, a common tactic of genocide deniers, which is still being used. (In case it needs mentioning, I'm more worried by hate speech than factually incorrect content)

By contrast, when I added comments critical of the question, saying "#JewsDidHiroshima", and later "#JewsDidHiroshima /sarcasm", they were deleted.

I can understand a strict moderation system deciding to delete my comments, or a hands-off moderation system allowing the question. But I'm rather puzzled by a moderation system that allows the question, but doesn't allow my comments.

  • As far as I can tell, the content about the Jews was edited out, and then the post was locked by Yannis after the OP reverted the edit. That's not exactly what I would call "allowed" – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica May 31 '16 at 2:19

After looking at the Edit history It looks to me like the antisemitic portion of the question was removed, and that the question was locked. So no, the antisemitic part of the question was not allowed.

As for your comments, without going into whether or not sarcastic comments are an appropriate way to flag an offensive question, they don't even make sense after the antisemitic content of the question was removed, so they're obsolete at the very least.

  • They do make sense if the user is likely to roll back changes. – Andrew Grimm May 31 '16 at 2:46
  • 1
    @AndrewGrimm the user is not likely to roll back the changes because the question is locked – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica May 31 '16 at 2:47


Why did America use atomic bombs to end WWII with Japan but not do the same to end the war with Germany?

This shows some weakness in terms of historical knowledge, but this much of it is a legitimate question.

Now there were some additional speculation in the question that could be considered anti-Semitic. Those have been edited out to leave just the question. So the question was not allowed in the virulent form but was edited into something softer. It has also been locked into the current form, so it can't be edited.

There's no mechanism for editing comments and even if there was, nothing you've said here suggests that they had any informative content whatsoever.

And finally, combative comments are unlikely to lead to consensus. They tend to increase partisanship instead. People who agreed with the original form of the question agree more and people who disagree disagree more. They move away from consensus rather than towards. We should prefer less confrontational interactions with biased posters. Particularly before we have enough information to determine if the poster is merely ignorant or trolling.

linking an ethnic group that suffered genocide with a large-scale killing, a common tactic of genocide deniers

If editing the question is not sufficient, this seems like a more constructive comment to make than anything involving a hashtag.

  • Why should we seek a consensus with such users, rather than indicate such attitudes are not welcome here? – Andrew Grimm May 31 '16 at 2:44
  • There's no mechanism for editing comments actually, yes there is – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica May 31 '16 at 2:58
  • @Brythan Do you consider that all comments which are considered trolling are automatic candidates for deletion? Might not there be some trolls which are actually useful to the site, either in the short, medium, or long-term and which draw attention to important points? – Peter David Carter Jun 7 '16 at 9:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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