0

On this question, someone asked whether or not the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms could fail to protect a minority from a holocaust type of situation. I posted some detailed comments explaining a real life situation (laws that have been passed) that proved that it was possible for the Charter to legally become a completely useless pieces of paper to Canadians, simply by accusing them of being a terrorist.

For some reason, a moderator thought it was a good idea to come along and delete all of these comments. I'd like to know why, because I'm noticing this happening across the SE network in general. That is, moderators selectively deleting comments that don't appear to violate any established rules.

I was not rude, I did not attack anyone, I did nothing but state my opinion and backed it up by facts to point out that the premise of the question was wrong, and that the answer given was fundamentally flawed as well. I'd like to know why I was apparently censored, because we're all giving our free time voluntarily here to help each other, and it's pretty frustrating having your input arbitrarily removed.

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5

As per How do comments work? on Meta Stack Exchange (my emphasis):

Comments exist so that users can talk about questions and answers without posting new answers that do not actually answer their parent questions. Comments are often used to ask for clarification on, suggest corrections to and provide meta-information about posts.

When should comments be deleted?

Comments are temporary "Post-It" notes left on a question or answer. You should not expect them to be around forever: Once a clarification has been made, an edit added to the post to include new information, or the issue in the comment is otherwise resolved, it is subject to deletion. In reality, many obsolete or chatty comments remain untouched due to the high volume of comments posted, but this does not mean that they can't or shouldn't be deleted in the future.

Comments are temporary. If you believe you provided enough facts to support a dissenting answer, it should be posted as an answer. Those comments were flagged for moderator attention - I don't look for comments to delete.

Your comment was a starting point for an answer and didn't really suggest improvement or clarification to the answer you commented on - it barely even referred to it. I hadn't read that question, so I probably wouldn't have noticed it if it weren't for the flag - this isn't a reason to keep it.

17
  • What was the flag for? Obviously it found a reason to be deleted, other than being too chatty.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:28
  • The reason for the flag isn't as important as whether the flag should have occurred at all - that is, even if the flag reason was incorrect, if there is a reason for it to be removed, then the comment will be. There was more than one flag and with different reasons.
    – jimsug
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:35
  • Alright cool. I'll help out then and trawl through the site flagging all comments because according to this answer, they're all just chatty. I'm of course being sarcastic, don't worry.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:39
  • I hope so. Creating extra work for volunteer moderators who, along with everyone else, I hope, are just trying to help improve the site, isn't going to be looked kindly upon.
    – jimsug
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:41
  • Sure no worries, I'm just pointing out that this answer is complete nonsense and so is the referenced answer as a reason. This site is filled with chatty nonsense comments. My comments were directly relevant to pointing out the false premise of the question and I gave reasons at length.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:42
  • Not to mention that two out of the four comments deleted were comments made on an erroneous answer given, comments specifically to "suggest corrections to and provide meta-information about posts", completely in compliance with your posted guidelines. No answer has been given as to why those were mopped up. Let's face it, one or more people just didn't like them and instead of posting a dissenting opinion or engaging in discussion on the matters, lets just bring in the moderator with his big hammer and tape this guys mouth shut. This, is completely inappropriate.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:54
  • 5
    There were three comments, two of them yours. Your comments essentially said that you disagreed, then attacked the premise, as you said, of the question. You didn't suggest corrections to the answer. And no-one's telling you not to post - if your comments suggest a different answer should have been posted, post an answer.
    – jimsug
    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:58
  • 4
    @TechnikEmpire First, I'm going to establish that I'm an independent neutral third party, as I only glanced at the comments when I saw them. Second, they were not directly relevant to the answer they were applied to. The answerer did not mention international law or terrorism, which were the focus of your comments. As such, I think that it's best that they were removed.
    – HDE 226868
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:00
  • The entire premise of the question is whether or not the Canadian charter or rights protects people from horrible evils like the holocaust. I then provided proof via referencing legislature that has already received royal ascent and is law, which gives the government the power to arbitrarily revoke your protection under these charters. Completely. They can label you and just like that, they're allowed to do anything but rape and kill you. So right there, those rights are not some set in stone thing offering anyone any protection whatsoever.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:05
  • So the original assumption that it does protect you but may have some loopholes becomes irrelevant, since it's proven that the government can just pass laws to make it not protect you at all.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:05
  • Further, the answer posted implies, as a solid line of defense, that the Queen's representative would never allow laws which allow such evils to happen to a citizen be passed. I again pointed out that she has already done this, so that answer is flawed as well. These are directly relevant and anyone pretending that they're not either lacks understanding or willfully denies it to justify coming in blowing away my input, which is also volunteer.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:06
  • 3
    @TechnikEmpire I'm not saying they were totally invalid; I'm saying that the comments should have been made on the question, or converted to an answer.
    – HDE 226868
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:07
  • 1
    @TechnikEmpire Please give me the text of your comment that supports that, because I don't recall seeing that last bit anywhere.
    – HDE 226868
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:12
  • 1
    I'm not going to split hairs and try to prove that I said what I'm saying I said. I made relevant comments without posting an answer because, one can understand that something is not a correct answer without being able to provide a more complete answer. I just wanted to bring this up because this is a problem that effects the entire SE network and it really pisses me off. Moderators coming in and unilaterally cleaning shit up that they have no business cleaning up. Moving the comments to chat MAYBE I could see, but not blowing away my input. Now here's a comment you're justified to delete.
    – user900
    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:17
  • 2
    @TechnikEmpire If you believe this is a network-wide problem, you can post it on Meta Stack Exchange and see whether the network at large agrees with you. As for your comments, you had two of them. Really, no-one should get attached to comments, because they're not meant to be permanent.
    – jimsug
    Oct 22, 2015 at 4:03

You must log in to answer this question.