-4

Starting point, the question asked by user2501323:

"Does Greta Thunberg acts alone, only with her family?"

Recently, we all heard Greta's emotional speech about climate and world problems. I was a bit surprised, how that small girl could climb so high - into UN tribune. Then I opened wiki, but didn't find anything about its support from big funds/millionaries/something other. I heard that her family supports her, but I wonder, if that is enough to climb into UN?

Question is, does there exist some big fund/billionare/politics who stands above Greta? If no, then it's very impressive way - from school to UN tribune.

My problem is the following. Does situation when a random kid, moreover suffering from autism, so being in even worse position to play crowds well, suddenly becomes a global celebrity is surprising interesting outlier? Yes. Is natural to ask about source of success? Yes.

OK. But there is a problem. The family of this kid were prior already quite rich, very influential (local celebrities) and were investing in green business. Suddenly big part of the success starts making sense, regardless of any support of third parties or lack thereof.

However, there is a problem - as worded the question effectively ask for support of third parties and I can not rule all of it out, while that's what the question ask for.

Thus I ask the following question:

Her family is an affluent upper class people, with effective control of 2 companies, including one stock market company earning on fighting AGW and one pro-ecological foundation. So if anything, I'd say that she is just a kid making a publicity stunt to support a family business, which would be usually considered as proper thing to do. In your question you ask whether someone is helping her parents, but I'm not sure whether you're also interested about her parents being influential and rich enough not to need extraordinary amount of help.

There was some answer, in line of "interesting, please sources"

Then those 2 comments disappear. Later user Philip admits he did it. In the same time I write a comment with link:

Inexplicably mainstream media tend to avoid the issue, but matter of what's written in company register seems for me as quite clear and straightforward. https://standpointmag.co.uk/issues/june-2019/gretas-very-corporate-childrens-crusade/

It also disappears. Thus, before escalating the issue, I tried politely to ask user to stop abusing his powers, while asking the other user, to properly rephrase the question.

@Philipp Would you please end your abusive behaviour of deleting question specifying comments? user2501323 May you rephrase your question, so details of her family being already rich, well connected and controlling a listed company in green business, would not risk being considered as off topic?

Unfortunately this got deleted too, with answer:

Comments deleted. Please don't use comments to answer the question. If you would like to answer, please post a real answer which adheres to our quality standards. If you do, please also be critical of your sources. While I did some cursory research on the topic I stumbled upon a lot of baseless speculation from conspiracy theorists.

So it becomes even more interesting:

  • I can not ask the user to rephrase the question, while pointing out why it would make some sense
  • If I answered question as it is, it would be fine to downvote my answer on grounds that maybe it's interesting but actually off topic
  • he can not claim that he is just protecting from offtopic discussion, because he already used two sentences to express his negative opinion about preliminary sources.

Regrettably, that's not the only case of his abusive behaviour. He already abused his powers to delete my answer under excuse of antisemitism, even though my whole way reasoning was based on the fact that accusation against Jews are groundless. As he is clearly intelligent enough to understand that, I unfortunately have to assume maliciousness.

It's not about those questions as such, but about such persistent behaviour. (if only one case happened, I'd assume that was just accident, bad day or misunderstanding) Is there any good formal or informal way to make him stop such behaviour?

  • 5
    "Thus I ask the following question" What question? There's no question in your comment. Your comment - as phrased - appears a lot more like an attempt at answering the question than a request for clarification. – yannis Sep 24 at 11:13
  • 2
    I agree with yannis, if I were asking for clarification there I would have phrased it more explicitly as a question. Something like: "Are you aware that Greta Thunberg's family are themselves quite rich and influential? [insert link]". I'm not saying you weren't asking for clarification, but I can see how Philipp may have thought you weren't. – F1Krazy Sep 24 at 11:30
  • 8
    You seem to have a misunderstanding of the role of comments on StackExchange: comments are ephemeral – they are intended to be temporary requests for clarification which are then deleted. They're not for arguing, or making points, or having discussions. While you've framed this as a request for clarification, you clearly have a point you want to argue here. That's fine, but you should do it in an answer so the normal moderation system can work on it. If you make it in a comment, you should expect it to be deleted as that's what comments are for here on StackExchange. – divibisan Sep 24 at 16:08
  • Does she really '"suffer" from autism' to that extent? Is that how she would characterize it? Or is this some bigotry attempting to justify a conspiracy theory? – AquaticFire Sep 24 at 19:01
  • 5
    Your starting position that this is abusive behavior by an elected moderator, rather than consistent misuse of comments by you, seems like it's going to make a productive conversation impossible. – Chris Hayes Sep 24 at 20:45
3

Philipp will perhaps give his own answer here, but from what I recall he commented (I think alluding to your deleted comment) that if you have an answer write it as such, not as a comment. He also said something about supporting such claims (about who has an interest because of stock holdings etc.) with sources.

Answers on politics SE don't always go in the narrow channel that is formed by the question, i.e. they can range as far as outright frame challenges, or anything in between, such as answering a direct financing question with something about broader financial interests/incentives. So, if you think the [financial] information you know about is worthwhile, you can put it in an answer still. (I'm not saying it will be necessarily well received; it depends on the source[s] and how [un]reasonable it is for someone who believes in ecology to also invest in green techs etc. One can complain for instance that a US stock market analyst who predicts a US stock market boom is invested in US stocks, which he probably is, to some extent. Whether that's enough to invalidate his point/prediction is another matter.)

The problem with SE comments is that they only allow upvotes. I've seen plenty of wrong info in comments that I wanted to downvote, but I couldn't, of course. And replying to comments with counterpoints turns the whole thing into a forum, i.e. negates one of the main design principles of a Q&A site. This can probably be overlooked when it's over side-issues, but answering the question itself in comments should generally be avoided. I admit I sometimes do it too, it but usually in the form of quick/link pointers when I don't have time to write an answer, especially when the question is multi-faceted, but I only know something about one of the sub-issues. I don't mind if such comments get deleted (sometimes they do.) My final point is: if you're bothered enough that your comment-answer was deleted (to complain here about it), do write an actual anwer. (Well, I see that question got closed in the meantime, but my point stands in general.)

You must log in to answer this question.

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