Anyone who has been regular on HSE in the last few days knows that a certain user has an agenda on certain sects, on figures of authorities in Hinduism etc. Even though his questions look for open ended answers, the moment a comment/answer is contradictory he replies with disparaging remarks. And then comments have to be flagged for intervention. Others have advised him to try skeptics SE, but for some reason he is interested in referencing hinduphobic websites in his Q&A.

Incidentally while typing the above paragraph, this question came on top of similar questions :-) . So I am interested to know whether user's past behavior has any bearing on moderator's decision making process?

EDIT : This is not a duplicate of this question because 1) It comes across something more than political agenda 2) I have also asked about policy to deal with repeat offenders 3) The question being proposed as similar does not have an answer

  • 4
    haha looks like you're new here :P ? This is like the 4th time he got banned, patiently waited for the suspension sentence to be completed, and now back to his trolling ways. It provides us with comic relief from time to time.. It's like Jarasandha attacking Mathura, losing, coming back, losing, coming back. lol
    – ram
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 5:40
  • There are some Qs already on "users having hidden agenda" like this and this. So, your Q might turn out to be a duplicate.BTW its not about one or two users, my perception is, right now, the site is dominated by various kinds of skeptics. This is a site for people to learn more about Hinduism. But, what these users are here for is seemingly to demean Hinduism
    – Rickross
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 6:06
  • At some point I will try to figure out how he ended up with so many rep points. Btw perhaps a silly question - how does one ensure that upvoting does not result in apatra Dana. After all a user racks up rep points and then reveals true colors which includes misleading new users and demean hinduism Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 6:23
  • Rep points don't mean anything any longer. Previously one upvote on a question would have given u 5 points and one upvote on an answer 10. Now, for both the cases its 10. Its very easy to get rep points now... This rule change, which occurred around few months ago, is the most unjust thing to happen here IMO. @Carmensandiego
    – Rickross
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 6:48
  • 1
    Does this answer your question? Should we allow users with political agendas on this site? Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 10:17
  • @sv - If you are going to vote this question as a duplicate of another one, then please make sure that the latter has an answer. Secondly nowhere have I said in my question that this user has a political agenda. Perhaps some ulterior agenda. But then I am not surprised with your vote given your inclination to even close the Yoga question. Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 10:24
  • 1
    Unlike the main site, on meta, we can mark questions duplicate of others without answers - that's just how it works. Besides my vote is not final word. Re: your yoga question - I wasn't the only voter, there were 4 other voters who also voted to close your question, yet I was the only one who took time to explain to you why it's opinion-based. Please remember, this is a community-based website so you need to convince the community why they should allow your question. Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 10:39
  • @sv - And I had already commented how you are judging the book by its cover. If others had bothered to comment while voting to close I would have replied accordingly. And on this question, once again you are just voting blindly despite no similarities in the questions. Sure the other question may not have had an answer, but if there was an answer it would have provided some direction to others like me Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 10:44
  • @rickross - where is your outrage when adherents of a certain minority sect have been denigrating beloved deities of hundreds of millions of Hindus from day 1 of HSE to today? they might answer what we are citing is in "scripture" - sectarian scripture that is - they have been dishing it out all the time - they should be man enough to take it also.
    – S K
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 10:55
  • This @rickross hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/27087/… attacks your religion. But t is supposed to be scripture, that denigrates a story that moves the devout to tears even today. the position "EVERYTHING IN SCRIPTURE IS LITERALLY TRUE" is not tenable about any religion.
    – S K
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 13:11
  • EXACTLY @rickross - I would add "Modern" to your "mainstream". Once you see peoples' posts through the lens of modernity - it would become clear who the constructive and destructive posters are. I'll also cite "puranamityeva na sadhu sarvam"
    – S K
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 13:43
  • 'but if there was an answer it would have provided some direction to others like me' - here's one answer, another, and another. Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 23:04
  • re: your yoga question, you can always flag the mods to reopen it or do a post on meta on why it should be reopened. Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 23:08
  • 1
    @ram It is truly a testament to how persistent, patient, and resilient he is. He even becomes back on the day of his year-long suspension being over.
    – Ikshvaku
    Commented Mar 3, 2020 at 23:48
  • @sv - Oh i did flag for reopening , but apparently flags are only meant for content that require intervention. Commented Mar 4, 2020 at 3:40


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .