0

There was an answer provided by this question

Who voted for Arthur J. Jones the neo-Nazi Republican candidate for Illinois's 3rd congressional district?

That was deleted by a Moderator. The answer provides a thoughtful analysis of the rise of antiSemitism on the left as a contributing cause, which is not only possible but probable. It seems the answer was only deleted because the moderator wished to hide this fact.

  • 2
    I don't know about "rude or abusive", and of course I can't see the answer, but I'm not sure how a "thoughtful analysis" of the left wing would answer a question about a right-wing party. – F1Krazy Aug 1 '18 at 14:11
  • 2
    @F1Krazy I didn't have the chance to read the answer he is referring to, but people can vote "against" a party as much as they vote for one. In a mostly two party system, that could mean voting right-wing rather than left or being a "NeverTrumper". – user_42 Aug 1 '18 at 17:19
  • 1
    There appears to be a bit of a back story I was not aware of with this particular user. Closing – K Dog Aug 1 '18 at 18:16
2

I deleted this answer because a user flagged it as rude of offensive. I decided that the flag was warranted because the answer is mostly an unsubstantiated allegation that "the left" would be willing to support a person who self-identifies as a neonazi because his anti-zionism appeals to them. This kind of rhetoric which generalizes and demonizes a mainstream political direction is toxic for this community. Either that, or the even more disturbing interpretation that the author sincerely considers anti-zionism to actually be a positive quality which outweighs fascist tendencies. But in dubio pro reo. Also note that the answer had a voting score of +0/-3 when I deleted it, so nothing of value was lost.

Now some might point to instances where similar rhetoric against "the right" is posted on this website. If you find some content offensive, flag it and we moderators will evaluate it. We do not read all the content posted on this website. If you don't flag content then you can not assume that we moderators endorse it.

Whether or not the user has a history of posting certain content should not matter for the evaluation of a single post. Each post should be judged in isolation. But I think it is understandable that we moderators take a closer look at content posted by users who caught our attention before.

  • 2
    I apologize Philipp. I should not have assumed intent on your part. There was a back story on this guy that became more apparent that I was not aware of. – K Dog Aug 1 '18 at 19:58
  • For the benefit of those unable to see the answer, part of the answer has "from left and right". – Andrew Grimm Aug 2 '18 at 12:13
2

I was one of the people that flagged it. The user started with an "r", right?

The user in question has a history of posting "globalist" conspiracy theories and unfounded attacks against liberals, Jews, and news agencies allegedly in cahoots with the former. I've been regularly flagging those answers as rude and abusive as well. From any other user, the answer would have been poorly sourced and unnecessarily heated and worthy of a downvote, but coming from this one I didn't feel like cutting them any slack.

  • 3
    Seems the direct opposite that he was calling out Antisemitism – K Dog Aug 1 '18 at 18:05
  • But maybe there is a back story I am not aware of. – K Dog Aug 1 '18 at 18:07
  • 1
    While I do feel the same about certain users, this is really not the right attitude. 1. We should judge the content of individual posts, not users. 2. This also doesn't work very well, since usernames can change quickly and for other users without much trace, offering a convenient escape from such 'history' 3. Cutting any slack or not is against my principle of trying to treat all users the same (with more patience for newbies, though) So, if you saw that A as 'rude because antisemitic', please flag all such content uniformly. – LаngLаngС Nov 9 at 17:59

You must log in to answer this question.

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