I have noticed what seems to be a strong political bias in votes on politics.stackexchange in general and, more importantly, in [on hold] votes. I have following questions concerning that:
- What is the process to challenge [on hold] votes?
Though my question What could the UK stand to gain from the attempted assassination of ex-spy Skripal? is absolutely symmetrical to the question What would the Kremlin stand to gain from killing the ex-spy Sergey Skripal? and seems equally useful, it has been voted [on hold] by several individuals for what I see as obviously bogus reasons.
Me and another person, who already had answered the question have edited it multiple times in order to avoid further doubts about its validity and compliance with Stackexchange's policies. However while the other question is considered perfectly valid and received a +48 score, there is no way to unset the [on hold] status of my question and there is absolutely no reaction from the [on hold] voters after the questions has been edited several times.
I have tried to include the reasons for the validity and compliance of the question in the question itself (under "SIDE NOTE"). What is the normal procedure for dealing with an unfair treatment of a question? Where can I put an argumentation for the validity of a certain question or comment on the reasons given in an [on hold] vote? How can I cause a vote amongst users of Stackexchange, who vote considering the policies of Stackexchange and don't mute questions following their own political beliefs, affiliations, etc.?
As I consider it a relatively clear case: Is there a way to call for moderator action on an issue like that? Is there a way to let a moderator check the validity of the reasons given in an [on hold] vote?
Is there a penalty for users supplying bogus reasons in their [on hold] votes?
Right now it seems that there is absolutely nothing I can do that would allow my question to get a fair treatment and a treatment according to the policies of Stackexchange.
In the particular case I consider both questions equally useful and I think that looking at both questions and high quality answers to them could enable a reader to form a balanced opinion on the topic and not fall victim to propaganda from one side or the other.
Nevertheless, there is clearly the option to declare that both questions in some way violate Stackexchanges's policies. If however the question What would the Kremlin stand to gain from killing the ex-spy Sergey Skripal? is perfectly fine, I would expect a fair treatment for the symmetric question. In my opinion, allowing only one of the questions and deleting the other one would be allowing an abuse of the platform for propaganda purposes.
For a more systematic argumentation on the validity of my question, please read the "SIDE NOTE" which is currently in the question itself: What could the UK stand to gain from the attempted assassination of ex-spy Skripal?