7

After OP asked this question [mirror], it was closed. OP edited [mirror] the question and added the text "[opened]" in the title.

Following which I made a comment:

Adding [opened] on your question's title won't open a closed question. It needs to be voted by privileged users to open a post again.

OP responded:

@Serverus Snape I know that much. It was just for fun. So that it looks funny n symmetrical. I like symmetry. So that was me being funny. U should also do that man sometimes. N I don't need it to be open I don't care also I was just here for timepass due to lockdown n it also helps me in learning abt shastras that's it dude n nothing else. 👍

Question:

  • How should the community deal with such behaviour?

Screenshots for reference:

question

comments

10
  • 2
    You can roll back the misleading edit and flag for moderator attention if OP engages in the rollback war. – Pandya Mod Feb 10 at 16:39
  • Looks like a relatively new user who came from other social sites. Maybe we should give him some gap than asking him too many questions. Just pass out a link for the OP to read and give some time. – Mr_Green Feb 10 at 17:41
  • The question seems neat. So voted to reopen. But it is just my opinion, if that question is bothering OP after reading all those scriptures then I am happy that I didn't read them (The OP is still categorizing body parts as sexual and non sexual). – Mr_Green Feb 10 at 17:44
  • @Mr_Green It is not about the question. I don't have knowledge on that. It's about the intentional "fun" (in OP's words). – Severus Snape Feb 10 at 17:49
  • @SeverusSnape yeah, I think it's better to give that OP some gap, being a relatively new user. I feel they just don't know the rules. we should just provide a link and give them some time to understand. If this was done already then that will be a different story now. – Mr_Green Feb 10 at 17:52
  • @Pandya looks like one user from the above post deleted their account, most possibly by seeing the replies on their answer. I believe we should work on some plan to welcome/behave with new users properly. – Mr_Green Feb 10 at 18:02
  • 1
    @Mr_Green OP has been a member for 8 months, and in the past we have seen OP's reluctance to taking suggestions. To the best of what I remember, this is perhaps the third time I have flagged OP's content. Once for writing content of question as an answer, and once for endless debates on comments. So, while this community welcomes new users and even helps promptly, such actions need stern measures (or at least some measures like what Pandya has suggested in the comment) – Severus Snape Feb 10 at 18:15
  • @SeverusSnape ok cool. Just added comment – Mr_Green Feb 10 at 18:24
  • 2
    @Mr_Green I have tried to improve the title of the question and posted couple of comments to OP :) – Pandya Mod Feb 11 at 3:15
  • 3
    @Mr_Green The OP was engaging in deceit and is trying to justify it by saying it's "fun". We should ban him. – Ikshvaku Feb 11 at 13:58
3

How should the community deal with such behavior?

They should be banned. Adding "[opened]" in the title is cheating/lying. They are exploiting the tools on the site (the edit feature) to deceitfully give the impression that their question was opened when it was not.

The OP even admitted his deceit:

I know that much. It was just for fun.

The OP even knew that his question wasn't opened, yet he added "[opened]" in the title "for fun". This shows that he was not ignorant of the site rules. He knew he was lying/cheating when he put [closed] in the title "for fun". Is lying and cheating fun to the OP?

Then he is encouraging other users to violate the site rules:

U should also do that man sometimes.

What is his justification for this immoral activity?

So that it looks funny n symmetrical. I like symmetry. So that was me being funny.

So, it looks like he doesn't care about the site rules. He is fine with breaking rules if he finds it "funny" and "fun".

The OP is also an adult, not a small child, so his behavior is even less excusable.

3
  • I agree I felt OP was playing victim card frequently, was replying harshly and saying "anyway leave it". But I don't think it is enough to ban a user. OP has been bought to attention of the community. So, let's consider action based on future activity. Btw, I felt mistake from our end too. we were asking unnecessary questions. – Mr_Green Feb 11 at 14:54
  • 1
    @Mr_Green He seems to have a rebellious, argumentative nature with no respect for authority or rules. – Ikshvaku Feb 11 at 15:38
  • 2
    It’s his basic nature, you can’t help him better to leave him be. He argues with, you, even Pandya, me, Snape, etc. See this, and this for a rough idea. – Archit Feb 11 at 17:33
2

Disclaimer: This is a general attempt trying to highlight mistakes from our end when discussing with other users.

I am trying to compare programming SEs with religion SEs here. My intention is not to harm anyone but attempt to explain to everyone what I think is happening here.

In any programming SE,

  • A new user, who is junior joins. He1 talks humbly with everyone because he wants to learn to program as much as he can. After all, they have a goal like a career development, zeal or job depends on it. He needs answers which work for him. In other words, he wants to know the answer.
  • A new user, who is expert joins. He starts answering or asking complex questions. Some of his answers are wrong and other experts on the platform can prove it by providing necessary fiddles or case studies. He understands them and accepts his mistakes.

Now, the same model can't be applied to religious sites. Because, with respect, people respectfully believe something but don't know it. Even if they know it, they can't prove it to others (everyone knows this). They believe that dearly close to their hearts.

Though the religion of most of the users is the same, their beliefs differ based on the scriptures or sutras they read or gurus they follow. There is a high possibility that the questions or answers here contradict a person's or people's beliefs.

What the community can do?

  1. If the post is against one's beliefs but in the scope of HSE, ignore the post (applies to both question or answer) - don't even comment.
  2. If the post itself is influencing the war or has content that is non-constructive (that includes adding 'open' in the question title when it is closed) - Try to edit the post to make it constructive or if it can't be repaired then vote to close or flag to the mods.
  3. If a user (irrespective of new or old) talking with you informally or in a funny way, flag it and optionally reply with be nice policy. We can't expect everyone to follow it so it is the active users' responsibility to know where to stop.

How this applies to the discussion here?

  • OP started commenting harshly when others mentioned that it is a tamasic scripture. Irrespective of tamasic or satvic, the question is in scope. We shouldn't have done that. I am thinking OP thought the later comments from other users as being ganged up against him and reacted as such. This spiced up when we even answered stating it is tamasic stuff. But this doesn't mean the OP has the right to be informal or harsh. The be nice policy applies to everyone.
  • Also, looks like the OP's discussions were flagged before but I don't think he was informed before of the "be nice" policy.
  • To this specific question, I have shared the be nice policy with the user. If such a thing still happens in the future then we can definitely think of the ban. I don't think the data we have has a one-sided fault, currently.

From the "be nice" page: enter image description here

To conclude:

  • Ignore in-scope posts that are against your beliefs. You can't make them believe in what you believe (it is not as simple as creating a fiddle in the program to prove the point).
  • Don't participate in unnecessary or debate related discussions in the comments. and if you are already in it, be the person to stop it.
  • We should be nice with other users if we really want this site to grow. (i.e new users should feel welcomed but not delete their accounts)
  • Edit the posts to make them constructive.
  • Flag non-constructive comments and posts. If possible remind them of the "be nice" policy, irrespective of new/old users.

1. He or she

4
  • What is the last thing you wrote: "He or she". What do you mean? – Ikshvaku Feb 11 at 23:46
  • 1
    Ah tried to refer the superscript number at the end. Couldn't format it properly – Mr_Green Feb 12 at 2:31
  • 1
    I also think few of our actions agitated him but biggest issues is that his Qs are inspired from mahapashupatastra.com blog (he confirmed this to me in a comment)... This and it's counterpart narayanastra.blogspot.com tries to prove supremacy of Shiva and Vishnu respectively which invoke users to argue on Shiva v/s Vishnu...I hv seen harsh comments mostly when a post (knowingly or unknowingly) tries to prove supremacy of one God over others.. – YDS Feb 13 at 5:23
  • @YDS that is fine. We can't nitpick each and everyone's intention behind asking the questions. If the question is on-topic then we should not discuss this. I do feel your intent but that is not how this site works. – Mr_Green Feb 13 at 11:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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