-7
$\begingroup$

I asked this question which I later learned was apparently preposterous and was heavily downvoted.

I was still positive that some one will one day come across my question who will be generous and patient enough to look through my question and help me understand it better.

So a few days ago I wanted to check the status of the question, but to my surprise I did not find it in my list of asked questions. And then I looked through my "all actions" tab and "reputation" tab entries. Nowhere!!

After like 30 mins of search fortunately I found an old conversation of mine, in a chat room , where I had mentioned the link to my question, So I was able to retrieve the question. And it said to undelete the question it required votes.

How are the upvotes from others are possible if you hide the question from everyone?

So I commented the link to this question, on my other questions requesting users to analyze it and upovote for the undeletion if they found it right. But then I get a private message from moderators, that such commenting is not in line with the spirit of the website and I should instead ask in meta site or a chat room, which I found completely justified, so I messaged them back apologizing and told them that I would delete the comments that I posted on my questions requesting the undeletion and I go onto delete the comments, again to my surprise all of my comments are deleted without my permission.

I find this is totally wrong on so many levels.

Firstly, we already have the privilege of downvoting the question. If we find someone's question to be inappropriate we can downvote it vehemently, but we should not have the privilege of deleting the question for who knows, after sometime there may come new visitors who will upvote the question more, so by deleting it you are preventing the self correcting mechanism of society. By deleting a question you are removing a data sample from the public access and I believe it is a violent invasion of freedom of speech. And the reason that is given is

Abandoned, unanswered questions can be a nuisance for readers when they appear in search results. While every question deserves a chance to be answered, at some point the annoyance to those searching for a solution outweighs the increasingly small chance that an answer will be provided.

For this reason, the Community user will automatically delete old abandoned / dead questions in the following circumstances:

"at some point the annoyance to those searching for a solution outweighs the increasingly small chance that an answer will be provided" . This is dangerous as this chooses practicality over truth. That is not how science works, we will have to examine extremely annoying ideas and take on ordeals, to come to the truth of reality. Instead of deleting the question, question with high downvotes can be shown in the end, therefore fixing nuisance problem. And people who are searching the answer will notice the downvotes and will not engage in that quesion. Why don't we let people decide for themselves. Rather than saying here is a question, which many people think is bad, see if you want to spend time on it, it is objectively worse to hide that question from the "those searching for a solution". A question is not an atomic statement. The question and its description can layout an unprecedented way of thinking which can bring forth valuable insights. By deleting the question all this organic nuanced dynamic is thrown out of window.

Secondly, even though we can delete the question, why are we removing every reference of the question, almost obsessively, from the website. In my personal profile, the question is deleted from my list of asked questions. How can we do it? Not just that, every reference of the question, from "all actions" and "reputation" entries is also erased? This was absolutely unnecessary, if I did not have the link to my own question somehow, I would have lost my question, I could have had some potentially valuable information or insight in that question. This is absolutely not acceptable, as this is almost equivalent to destruction of my private data and infringement of my privacy and my access to my own data.

Thirdly, I can't ask any question, because if I try to ask a question it says

"You have reached your question limit Sorry, we are no longer accepting questions from this account. See the Help Center to learn more."

Seriously? If we think that someone is not contributing to the community, we can take away that person's reputation. It is one of the purpose of reputation. But we simply cannot excommunicate the user. It seems to be a redundant functionality. And it's also not very effective, because all that someone needs to do is create a new account and start asking questions. This does not fix anything. Instead if we feel like someone is not genuine we can take the reputation off or make his/her reputation negative. So that particular person will obviously be neglected. And if some one spams with like 100 questions, I think we already have a system that you cannot ask more than one question in a fixed window time period. And lets say if a person just goes on asking gibberish, there should an upper-limit of questions for given reputation-downvote based history of previously asked questions. This is way better solution as compared to ban someone who has asked like 10 questions in my case.

In summary I agree there should be some measures to ensure the ease and quality of the website. And we do have such measures like downvoting, flagging, reputation loss. But I argue that deleting someone's question, and also banning that person from asking questions and obsessively removing references of the question thereby effectively taking away the access to the question, even to the person who asked it, is a blatant invasion of privacy and a violation of freedom of speech. A conflation of moderation with censoring. And a set of redundant unnecessary features which are arguably not the best practices in the field of Science, where truth is of the highest value.

I predict that this question will be met with rigorous downvoting, will be put on hold as off-topic or opinion-based, and in a couple of days closed and in a week or a month deleted and wiped clean from the face of this website. And then someone writes a blog on why stack exchange is hostile to newcomers. Seriously?

And I also speculate if Einstein was to be born in this day and age and asks something which is non-populistic, he will not be discussed with, instead his questions will be downvoted, he will be banned from asking questions, his questions will be wiped clean by the "routine" in turn operated by "moderators". This is not Science, this is online-mob-censoring.

P.S: Please do not confuse this with me blaming moderators and SE users. I am aware that deletion and banning happens automatically by preset routine. And that is exactly what I am talking against here. This is me trying to point out that the preset rules which guide the routine as of now, allow for blatant invasion of freedom of speech and privacy

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by ACuriousMind Dec 1 '18 at 16:32

  • This question does not appear to be about Physics Stack Exchange or the software that powers the Stack Exchange network within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I have a vague memory that you reposted the same question multiple times when the previous post got closed. My apologies if I have misremembered this. I can't easily check this, but a moderator could confirm whether this is the case. $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Dec 1 '18 at 12:14
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnRennie You are partially correct I posted different aspects of the same question two different times. When I first asked it, it was deleted and then I basically asked another aspect of the question which is the above mentioned question. This is what I am trying to convey, even though you are correct there is no way for you to prove it, because the questions and their links are completely wiped out. Data loss has occured $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 12:23
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnRennie And why does moderator has this exclusive privy towards what has happened, shouldn't it be public. Atleast I should be able to see the questions I asked, so that I can correct myself $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 12:25
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The reason I mentioned this is that it sounds as if you've run into an automatic ban applied by the SE not by our moderators. The SE has rules about how many deleted questions you can have before you're stopped from posting more questions. These rules are kept secret from us (even from the moderators) and there is no way we can override them. $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Dec 1 '18 at 12:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Your post (in particular several instances of the word "obsessive" and "privilege") reads as if you think that a human being went ahead and personally deleted your question and the links in the profile to it. That's not what happened - there's an automatic deletion routine that deletes posts meeting certain criteria on which no user on this site has any influence. $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Dec 1 '18 at 12:28
  • $\begingroup$ @ACuriousMind I know that. I meant exactly that. This automatic deletion routine is flawed. The person who has come up with it has designed it in such a way that the routine obsessively deletes every reference, and grants indirect privilege of causing the deletion of the question when people downvote a question. That is what I spoke against. $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 12:36
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnRennie I understand that, and I am not directly the SE moderators or users. I am questioning the rules which allow such things to happen. $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 12:38
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Since this is a general feature of Stack Exchange and not particular to physics.SE, it might be better suited on Meta Stack Exchange $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Dec 1 '18 at 12:51
  • $\begingroup$ @ACuriousMind noted, but is it ok to ask the same question there once again? $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 12:52
  • $\begingroup$ Wasn't there also a long discussion with you in the chat room? $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Dec 1 '18 at 13:35
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ In fact, as I recall, a lot of experienced physicists contributed a lot of their time - for free - to try and explain why your question didn't make sense. The discussion was marginally less productive than talking to a wall. $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Dec 1 '18 at 14:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Stackexchange is a privately owned site, therefore by removing answers from here they are no so much "removing a data sample from the public access " as they are removing data from their private site. For this reason, it also doesn't violate any rights to free speech. $\endgroup$ – JMac Dec 1 '18 at 14:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ cross-posted to mother meta: meta.stackexchange.com/q/319251/263383 $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Dec 1 '18 at 16:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ChakrapaniNRao The fact that you chose to try to use Stackexchange as a method of preserving something that you posted online is not Stackexchanges fault. You should not have been relying on it to keep a memory of those questions because there is nothing suggesting that SE is designed for such a thing. Content is routinely curated in various ways, and that includes deleting posts for multiple reasons. SE has no commitment to maintaining the data you submitted, and you shouldn't expect to use it as a memory storage service. These things you are treating as "rights" cost the site resources. $\endgroup$ – JMac Dec 1 '18 at 17:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Well, I'm not going to argue SE policies with you. I don't have a problem with any of the ones you're talking about really. Based on community responses, I don't seem very alone, so I'll just leave it at that. $\endgroup$ – JMac Dec 1 '18 at 18:12
3
$\begingroup$

Your question was not heavily downvoted: it collected two up and two down votes. It was

enter image description here

The question is quite unclear (as indicated in one of the comments) and FYI, you completely forgot to include any estimates of uncertainty on the time $t$ in your problem. Another quite appropriate comment deals with the macroscopic nature of your sphere, and the importance of decoherence in such problems. You chose to ignore both of these so you can't exactly blame the site for automatically deleting your question as being "abandoned" or "closed" (which it was).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I am sorry, I think I got confused with another question which is now wiped out $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 13:43
  • $\begingroup$ unclearness is subjective, unceratinty of time is not at all an issue as the time is in minutes. And I need to again see what other comment had to say. But again, I argue, none of it can adequately rationalize deletion, and blocking access of a question from the public $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 13:45
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @ChakrapaniNRao You are entitled to your opinion about deletion. The site does have an algorithm that will remove questions deemed not useful to maintain the high quality of the questions on the site. I must admit I feel it was appropriate to delete your question in view of the relevant comments, which you did not address. Even if your question were undeleted, it could not be answered as it is closed, so your first job would be to edit your question and gather enough vote to reopen it. I will point out that leaving comments in other posts is not the proper way to lobby for reopen. $\endgroup$ – ZeroTheHero Dec 1 '18 at 13:51
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I understood and I was about to delete all those comments. I was just alarmed that I could not find link to my own question. I was about to address those comments, but I needed time to go through the mentioned article and understand it, meanwhile my question was deleted $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 13:58
  • $\begingroup$ And FYI I did not ignore it $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 13:58
  • $\begingroup$ "Another quite appropriate comment deals with the macroscopic nature of your sphere, and the importance of decoherence in such problems." I remember now, quantum decoherence does not hold here because it does not have other particles in the picture. It has only one free electron. $\endgroup$ – Chakrapani N Rao Dec 1 '18 at 16:32

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