Return to Question

It's been a bit quiet in meta.SF the past few days, so I thought it was time to stir the pot. :)

So, I came across this question just now. Reading through the comments (see comment thread screenshot below), I flagged one for being "not constructive", and it was declined. Now, I couldn't care less about the declined flag. What I do care about is the fact that it is considered acceptable for high-rep users to treat new users like this. Sure, TomTom is right, this question was off-topic. That's fine - no need to insult and disrespect the OP for posting an off-topic question. Just VTC and be done with it.

Could someone (preferably the moderator who declined the flag) explain:

1. why the flag was declined
2. why this behavior is tolerated?
3. in whose world is this comment (third from the bottom of the thread) constructive for the mission of SF?

In the face of the numerous "THE SKY IS FALLING" threads on meta recently, I've been trying to remain engaged and optimistic. If this is what can be expected of our moderation staff going forward, though, I fear my optimism will wane quickly.

It's been a bit quiet in meta.SF the past few days, so I thought it was time to stir the pot. :)

So, I came across this question just now. Reading through the comments (see comment thread screenshot below), I flagged one for being "not constructive", and it was declined. Now, I couldn't care less about the declined flag. What I do care about is the fact that it is considered acceptable for high-rep users to treat new users like this. Sure, TomTom is right, this question was off-topic. That's fine - no need to insult and disrespect the OP for posting an off-topic question. Just VTC and be done with it.

Could someone (preferably the moderator who declined the flag) explain:

1. why the flag was declined
2. why this behavior is tolerated?
3. in whose world is this comment (third from the bottom of the thread) constructive for the mission of SF?

In the face of the numerous "THE SKY IS FALLING" threads on meta recently, I've been trying to remain engaged and optimistic. If this is what can be expected of our moderation staff going forward, though, I fear my optimism will wane quickly.

It's been a bit quiet in meta.SF the past few days, so I thought it was time to stir the pot. :)

So, I came across this question just now. Reading through the comments (see comment thread screenshot below), I flagged one for being "not constructive", and it was declined. Now, I couldn't care less about the declined flag. What I do care about is the fact that it is considered acceptable for high-rep users to treat new users like this. Sure, TomTom is right, this question was off-topic. That's fine - no need to insult and disrespect the OP for posting an off-topic question. Just VTC and be done with it.

Could someone (preferably the moderator who declined the flag) explain:

1. why the flag was declined
2. why this behavior is tolerated?
3. in whose world is this comment (third from the bottom of the thread) constructive for the mission of SF?

In the face of the numerous "THE SKY IS FALLING" threads on meta recently, I've been trying to remain engaged and optimistic. If this is what can be expected of our moderation staff going forward, though, I fear my optimism will wane quickly.

It's been a bit quiet in meta.SF the past few days, so I thought it was time to stir the pot. :)

So, I came across this question just now. Reading through the comments (see comment thread screenshot below), I flagged one for being "not constructive", and it was declined. Now, I couldn't care less about the declined flag. What I do care about is the fact that it is considered acceptable for high-rep users to treat new users like this. Sure, TomTom is right, this question was off-topic. That's fine - no need to insult and disrespect the OP for posting an off-topic question. Just VTC and be done with it.

Could someone (preferably the moderator who declined the flag) explain:

1. why the flag was declined
2. why this behavior is tolerated?
3. in whose world is this comment (third from the bottom of the thread) constructive for the mission of SF?

In the face of the numerous "THE SKY IS FALLING" threads on meta recently, I've been trying to remain engaged and optimistic. If this is what can be expected of our moderation staff going forward, though, I fear my optimism will wane quickly.