-4

Goldpseudo has been accused by many in the past, for his extremely rude behavior. He is only interested to run the site to please creators of this website

He engages in serial downvoting.

May Allah shut down Islam.stackexchange.

8

Ah, the everything is goldPseudo's fault problem is back! It's what motivated this post: Thank you goldPseudo!. I'm tempted to create a parody tag to categorize such posts. Some of them, like this one, are basically a rant and are wholly non-constructive.

First, be aware of what being a diamond moderator is about: see A Theory of Moderation (and the Moderator Agreement). With that in mind:

Overzealous closing:

  1. goldPseudo is a diamond moderator; it is part of his responsibility (along with the other diamond moderators) to close clearly inappropriate questions. People will naturally disagree sometimes, so don't expect 100% agreement.

  2. goldPseudo closes/deletes zillions of posts. However, maybe 95%+ or more, if I were a diamond moderator, I would do the same (many are just rubbish). Most decisions are uncontroversial, and probably most actions go unnoticed (we'd probably be swimming in rubbish otherwise).

  3. If you want to request an adjustment to a diamond moderator's overzealous closing behaviour, I suggest the following:

    • Edit to improve the question. If there's any way to improve the question, do that (e.g. make the question clear, and remove unnecessary chatter; indicate it's direct relevance to Islam; improve tagging; improve the title; avoid multi-question questions; give direct block quotations > ... for any claims, and links to references.) Once you feel the question cannot be further improved, then...

    • Give the question a chance to be re-opened. Diamond moderator closure decisions can be changed by users voting to reopen. If it's an obvious "whoopsy", it won't be difficult to attract reopen votes. Otherwise, it might not be as obvious as you think. If it fails to attract reopen votes, and you're still unsure about it being closed, then...

    • For each question you consider inappropriately closed, create a separate meta thread asking about why it was closed. Don't assume from the outset that the decision is unreasonable.

      • Please indicate why you think it's an appropriate question for the site. Be polite, detached, and not pushy. It might be helpful to reference similar questions which weren't closed as precedent. This gives a chance to respond.

      • You'll probably find that most of the time it's justified in some unknown way (with a sporadic "oops, what was I thinking").

      • Sometimes the reasons behind closing questions can be based on a culmination of factors. E.g., a user's comments [which may no longer be visible] indicate they're intending to start an argument, lack of effort, 90%-advice/10%-Islam question, and so on. These factors may individually not make the question close-worthy, but together make it worth closing the question.

      After doing this several times...

    • Demonstrate this is a repeated behaviour. Once several inappropriately closed questions have been identified, create another meta post linking to these to argue that this is a repeated behaviour, and not just a once-off "oops".

Excessive downvoting:

  • We don't get to tell other individual users how to vote. It's up to them. Not even diamond moderators see who upvotes and downvotes which posts (see meta.SE).

    Observations: (a) there's three regular users of this site who downvote more than they upvote (so it's not always clear who's downvoting, even if there's lots of downvoting going on); (b) your profile currently says you've voted 54 times, 33.3% downvotes.

    I personally feel that we need more upvoting, so that good-quality posts are highly rewarded, and I've made multiple meta posts encouraging users to upvote more (I think some people have been encouraged). I'm now the number one upvoter at the site (and the number five downvoter).

    Likewise, if you want to encourage a certain behaviour, I suggest (a) encouraging it on meta and explaining how it will help the site, and (b) lead the way by engaging in that behaviour yourself.

  • We need varying voting patterns between users so that good posts get upvotes, better posts get even more, etc. This encourages users to write better posts, regardless of their skill level.

  • Downvoting a lot is not the same as serial downvoting. Serial downvoting targets a particular user, and this is detected and reversed by the StackExchange software. Someone downvoting a lot is a legitimate user behaviour, as long as they're not targeting someone individually.

Shutting down Islam.SE

(Putting aside the irony of suggesting the whole site be closed in a meta post about overzealous closure...)

Many users are working hard to improve Islam.SE. It's not perfect, but it's improving over time. I doubt the site has any chance of being closed in its current state.

Also note you are not obligated to use Islam.SE if you don't like it. Quora and QA.Islam.com are alternatives. I'm fond of reddit/r/wholesomememes; this might help relieve some grumpiness. Here's an example post:

When your duckling learns to swim and you feel accomplished as a duck

How could anyone not feel better after reading that?

  • 6
    there actually was a goldpseudo tag for a while, but it died out because nobody actually cared enough to use it when they were ranting :( – goldPseudo Jul 5 '17 at 7:05
  • @goldPseudo I was disappointed to find out that "everything-is-goldpseudos-fault" was over the 25-character limit for tags. Fortunately, it is now possible since the character limit has been raised. – Rebecca J. Stones Aug 27 '17 at 9:20
  • "goldpseudo-mad-with-power" is exactly 25 characters. And yes, I had already put way too much thought into this. – goldPseudo Aug 27 '17 at 16:36

You must log in to answer this question.