@SonictheReinstateMonica-hog and the first two of those involved communication from SE -- in the first case, restoring access pending an explanation was a possibility, and in the second, the behavior was discussed before action was taken. (I can't speak to the third.) None of that happened this time, so while I'm hardly the first mod to be booted, we don't know if this "process" was new.
@SonictheReinstateMonica-hog what on earth would that achieve? "Sorry, but we don't have anyone available to talk to you right now. Please contact us via email".
But in all seriousness, see if you can meet in person with a Stack Exchange employee. (I've done so, but to be fair they weren't an employee at the time)
Reminds me of the Wikimedia Foundation's Knowledge Engine fiasco. They refused to give details about the funding of that project, citing "donor privacy" issues, and only did so after community members contacted the donor, who said there were no privacy issues on their end
A standard method for settling disputes is to agree on what the settlement looks like and agree not to litigate it. As soon as litigation is involved, costs go way up, discovery puts private information at risk, and things get overall stressful. Don't we all want to avoid that?
That's true, but there are people who actively litigate things in the hope of coming up with a formal ruling that can later be used as a case precedent
It's totally possible to get to a place where they resolve the defamation to my satisfaction and I agree not to sue for damages. That's achievable, if they want to fix this.
But it can backfire if the court rules against you. That happened to someone once, and to top it off the U.S. Congress passed a law explicitly banning the practice the defendant did
@MonicaCellio My impression is that they're not talking to you for legal reasons. No idea if that makes sense or not, I simply don't know enough about that in general, and not enought about the specific situation.
I have no special insight into their processes, but evidently either not or they don't think you would sue
or they made a cost benefit analysis and decided it's unlikely enough to sue that further engagement isn't worth it, from a purely business perpective. If that is the case, nobody will ever say that and nothing further will happen
It seems from my current perspective that the way this'll end is the way most outrages end. nothing happens and 3 months on everyone will get angry at you if you still bring it up for beating a dead horse
for a recent example see the blizz hongkong situation
My guess is that they're worried about legal issues as well as a twitter post calling them bigots getting traction with all the verified influencer types. It takes a whole lot of courage these days to tell the mob to pound sand.
What I really don't like is that SE has effectively painted a false picture that anyone who associates with Monica is associating with bigotry and anti-LGBT+ rhetoric.
> Public figures often apologize after making controversial statements. There are reasons to believe, however, that apologizing makes public figures appear weak and risk averse, which may make them less likeable and lead members of the public to want to punish them.
Guess it isn't automated, I starred a random comment of yours and it stayed up for 10 seconds (I manually removed it). I wonder what was wrong with what I starred, then?
OK so it looks like it's specific to things I star (not specific to posts you create that get starred), since I starred someone else's post and that star too was removed.
(testing if stars can individually be removed or if they can only be removed in bulk)
I think that true apologies where you demonstrate vulnerability are well-received (except by those who pounce on the weakness). Non-apology apologies are generally worse than silence.
I think that's spot on. Non-apology apologies are viewed as dishonest.
Heh, it seems that if I add my own star to an existing starred message, all the stars are cleared. :D
It's like I have the dangerous power to censor whatever I want just by associating with it!
@SonictheReinstateMonica-hog I think it isn't fully fixed, since I tried to star it again to see if the message was the same, but now it defaults back to the old "it's too late to undo this operation" message. It's funny how I'm learning so much about the chat system just because I'm targeted by ROs.
