-4

I am raising this issue of double standards on behalf of a moderator by the name goldPseudo. Though I know he is very active and does this site a fair share of favour. However, I strongly believe there must be some regulations put in place on things that he does. Because as obvious this is not the first time he is abusing his power.

So, the case is as follows (from the question "can recitation of the quran (ruqya) be used to heal physical ailments?"):

First comment snippet

I got engaged with a person in a constructive criticism in the comment section. I was trying to indirectly make a point by raising an issue which was related to what that person had just suggested in one of his comments. He believed reciting Quran to a person or creature with weak immune system heals and makes the immune system stronger. He implied that Quranic recitation could be used and can essentially replace medicinal therapies. I asked him to provide a proof. That's where he was about to get busted. But presumably the same belief is also shared by this so called moderator by the name goldPsuedo. Realising I am about to conclude a point which goldPsuedo doesn't agree with. He came in and intervened. saying "Comments are not for answers". He deleted all of our comments.

Second comment snippet

OK FINE.

I replied, by saying there are a tone of people who have used comments section and used it to provide answers and gave him an example of such question. I asked him why does he turn a blind eye on those users?. I basically tried to constructively criticise him. He again turned a blind eye and said "Comments are intended for constructive criticism":

Third comment snippet

Let me clarify what's going on here, the reality is that the point I was about to prove didn't inclined with the belief of this moderator and that's why he did not allow me to conclude something that is not well received by most of the religious fanatics, extremists, terrorists and fundamentalists. I think he himself is one of them because his attitude is not neutral. If someone posts a credible question or comment that has the potential to criticise muslims or make Islam look bad, instead of clarifying it, this person abuses his power to suppress that embarrassment. I think he should be regulated and if he refuses to act neutral, he should be striped of his privileges. This person also has a reputation to become personal with users like me who take things a little far. I know for sure, that once I post this question. He may try to abuse his power even then by having me banned one way or another. I may not be around to use this site for long. However, I warn him to refrain from such practice. Because in the end he is going to dishonor himself by indulging in such shameful practice.

  • 3
    Alternatively, maybe I deleted the comments for exactly the reasons I stated because they were an inappropriate use of comments, and you're just overreacting. See also islam.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment – goldPseudo Feb 11 '18 at 23:54
  • 1
    I am over reacting because you don't act neutrally. Something that doesn't make sense in your mind, you throw policy on that and do whatever to make yourself happy, However, you don't bother to apply the same tactics and policy to countless other cases that are as bad as this one in terms of policy violation but good in sense that you agree with what they say. This is not fair. Moreover, this is not the first time you doing this. Power abuse has just become breathing for you. – Qaisar Khan Feb 12 '18 at 0:07
  • 3
    There are many alternatives to arguing in comments. – Rebecca J. Stones Feb 12 '18 at 7:13
  • 1
    I edited the question so that I could understand your complaint. Removing a few of the accusations helped. I'd be really be surprised if those comments were removed because of the position they argued for. If either (or both) of the commenters had simply answered the question, I don't think we'd be here right now. This isn't a site for debate, but for well-considered answers to quesations about Islam. – Jon Ericson Feb 12 '18 at 8:32
6

Ok, so the core problem is that the moderator removed some comments and didn't remove other comments, right? After initially asking the question, you edited in:

and we don't want any Hitler, Stalin or a crack-head dictator to control this site.

I do agree those people (especially the dead ones) would make poor moderators. But what does that have to do with deleting comments?

For context, we've seen sectarianism threaten the site since the very beginning. I've been very concerned that the volunteer moderators maintain a level of neutrality when they take actions on the site. Without wise and level-headed moderation, this site seems doomed to fall into unending conflict until it is closed. So I try to take complaints against moderators seriously. To see some examples of this work, take a look at my Meta Islam Stack Exchange answers.

The trouble with this particular complaint is that deleting comments that should be answers is a typical moderator activity. If you find such comments, just flag them as "no longer needed" and a moderator will take a look. It's not so supposed to be dramatic or controversial. As a result, I'm having a hard time seeing how this incident indicates the moderator is a terrible person.

Therefore, I recommend removing rather than adding ad hominem attacks.

  • I do agree this incident is not significant to indicate the moderator is a terrible person. "so the core problem is that the moderator removed some comments and didn't remove other comments, right?" However, this is not the only incident where this moderator is creating a fuss. He has been like this for a long time. I hope you could check out the history and see the complaints lodged against him. This specific moderator is not maintaining neutrality but rather applying his agenda. Like I said he usually removes content that is a bit hard on Islam. That's not moderation... that's censoring. – Qaisar Khan Feb 12 '18 at 1:44
  • 4
    @QaisarKhan: I have looked at goldPseudo's history. Have you ever heard the fable of the boy who cried wolf? That's kinda how I feel sometimes. Once again, I don't see anything in this incident that would indicate some sinister plot to block certain people from expressing themselves. I just see a moderator dealing with some comments that could be answers. – Jon Ericson Feb 12 '18 at 8:22
  • I think we should not refer to it as a "sinister plot".. but more like "a slightly opinionated approach towards moderation". There are other moderators here as well, who are way neutral and better. Hopefully, the moderator in question will have learned something good out of it and will proceed with caution. I would personally hate to see him banned, because I do acknowledge his contribution towards this website.I appreciate your help @Jon Ericson and I think that's enough for now. I raised my concern and communicated my message clearly... I am happy with the response. Thank you everyone.. – Qaisar Khan Feb 12 '18 at 21:46
4

I got engaged with a person in a constructive criticism in the comment section

Constructive criticism is when the aim is to improve the post. Exchange of comments when trying to make a point is more of a debate over a controversial point. You should have used chat instead.

I was trying to indirectly make a point by raising an issue which was related to what that person had just suggested in one of his comments.

Comments are not for making points, directly or indirectly; this is termed "debating", which the comments section in Islam SE is not the right place for.

But presumably the same belief is also shared by this so called moderator by the name @goldPsuedo.

Unless there is clear evidence that this is the view of the moderator, then your statement is speculation, which does not elevate to the level of proof. Allah says in Qur'an 53:28 that "assumption avails not against the truth at all."

Let me clarify whats going on here, the reality is that the point I was about to prove didn't inclined[sic] with the belief of this moderator and that's why he did not allow me to conclude something that is not well received by most of the religious fanatics, extremists, terrorists and fundamentalists.

Labeling someone, presumably because of a difference of opinion, as a fanatic, an extremist, a terrorist, etc., is not an appropriate behavior neither Islamically, nor from the "be nice" site policy. What I find interesting is that the previous accusation to the moderators allegedly called them liberals and not sticking to the proper Islam. I guess there is no way to please everyone, to the extent of being accused of both ends of the spectrum within the span of two weeks.

We have a religious extremist and a hypocrite (munafiq) as one of the moderators here

There are guidelines and rules for judging someone as a hypocrite. My strong advice to you is to exercise extreme caution prior to calling someone a hypocrite or a disbeliever unless you have sufficient knowledge of the topic and clear evidence that one is so. Even then, one should always seek excuses for his or her brothers. 'Umar ibn Al-Khattāb said:

لا تظن بكلمة صدرت من أخيك شراً وأنت تجد لها في الخير محملاً

Do not think of a word that comes out of your brother as bad when you can find a reason for it to be good.

Ibn Sirīn said:

إذا بلغك عن أخيك شيء فالتمس له عذرا، فإن لم تجد له عذرا فقل لعل له عذرا

If something reaches you about one of your brothers, then seek an excuse for him, and if you do not find any then say "Perhaps he has a reason [to do so]."

You must log in to answer this question.

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