What violation caused this suspension? May I know the reason?
What violation caused this suspension? May I know the reason?
Well, I've read quite a bit of speculation and misinformation in the comments here, and in Dilaton's MSO thread, so please allow me to set the record straight:
We try hard to avoid discussing suspensions publicly. The intention is to remove a member from the site temporarily to give them and the moderators time to correct whatever behavior was causing problems. Nothing good comes of attaching a permanent stigma to someone for what might well have been a fleeting problem. As dmckee notes, moderators are instructed not to reveal the details of the suspension publicly.
I should note that moderators don't have a "ban" button. All suspensions are temporary, and can be for as little as a day. When you do happen upon a suspended user, it's probably worth your time to click the link provided and read the rationale for having a suspension feature at all:
When users exhibit a pattern of either …
No effort to learn and improve over time
… these problem behaviors have to be dealt with. When they aren’t, it takes up excessive moderator time that could be used for something more productive — and, even worse, these behaviors begin to actively turn people away from our community, stunting its growth and harming everyone.
It's not about public humiliation, it's not about driving folks from our midst. It's the exact opposite: a last-ditch effort to put a stop to poisonous, disruptive behavior.
We - the moderators, and the staff of Stack Exchange Inc. - take suspension pretty seriously. All site moderators are copied on the private messages sent to or from suspended users, as are those of us on the Community team at SE. If a suspension is unwarranted, any of us can and will step in to lift it.
Finally, a reminder: don't feed trolls. If you encounter someone who is obviously uninterested in learning, repeatedly posting answers or comments simply to push an agenda or get a rise out of others, post a good answer that corrects any misinformation, down-vote and/or flag the trollish posts for moderator attention, and walk away. Nothing can be gained from stooping to the level of someone setting out to cause disruption and mayhem; there's an old saying: "Never wrestle with a pig. You'll both get dirty, but the pig will like it."
This was a ridiculous suspension--- it was to do with the back and forth between me and Sachin Shekhar over the last two days, where the other fellow said some insulting things (like "you don't know anything!" "Who the heck are you" blah blah) and I responded to try to get him to answer questions properly and not troll. I never insulted him, but I did say he was factually wrong here and there a few times.
Then both me and this trolling user were suspended for 24hrs. I imagine it was an issue of symmetry, why suspend one party be suspended and not the other? But I don't think a single comment of mine was inappropriate, although perhaps a few of the other guy's were (but they didn't bother me, and I would prefer if there was no administrative action against him). I renounce any privacy to anything--- what could possibly be private here? All the comments are up for all to see (none have been deleted).
Here's the email I got from dmckee:
I'm writing in reference to your Physics - Stack Exchange account:
This account has been involved in several extended and acrimonious discussions in the comments recently. It seem that the style of interaction you employ in the comments invites conflict; often through sly implications that the other party is too stupid of ignorant to bother with. I am treating this as a violation of the "Be nice" injunction in the FAQ.
I am issuing a one day suspension so that all parties to the most recent instance can cool down, and will be removing many comments.
Regards, dmckee Physics - Stack Exchange moderator
As a comment to the above, I never make any implication, neither sly nor direct, that the party is too ignorant to bother with--- that would only be the case if I didn't say anything at all. I just wanted to make sure that Shekhar knew that people here don't just put up random gibberish, but they read and understand what they write, and they are careful, and I asked him to do the same. I don't think I made any comment at all that disparaged him, beyond saying "what you wrote in these answer is wrong, please fix it or delete the answer". I told him that he is capable to contributing honestly, and urged him to do so.
No, you may not. At least not from us.
This is a matter of privacy for the affected person. The suspended account-holder was contacted by email and by notification.
The affected individual can bring the matter up on meta after the suspension expires or they may contact the team directly and they will investigate what the moderation team has done.
The thing that makes me pretty angry about Ron's behaviour is that he does not distinguish between common consensus belief and his own private research--this makes evaluating his claims hard for a third party not familar with physics. I'm not going to make a definitive statement on his private conclusions, but they are decidedly non-orthodox, and a layperson is not necessarily clear on this. This is magnified by the fact that the non-orthodox views are supported by what an academic would consider to be wildly insufficient claims to support the strength of the provided arguments. Saying "Newtonian physics supports the theory of planetary motion" requires different evidence than "all string theorists are stupid idiots who deserve no attention."
Considering that stackexchange is not a forum that is suited to extensive citation, this is a problem--there's no natural system for citation, and the detail of your answer is as much as you want it to be, and the veracity of it is only as great as the people voting on it, which can be heavily influenced by a play to the audience.
"I am treating this as a violation of the "Be nice" injunction in the FAQ". Well dmckee should be congratulated for doing the right thing, although I wish He left the comments on so I and others can have a laugh at Ron going mad at people muddying the intellectual atmosphere of the site.
Anyone have a link to the comments that were deleted?