-2

Users would like to complain about the actions by certain superuser left unnamed out of respect, for deleting almost any comment by user @6065, see e.g. Why is it 出差去 and not 去出差?, in this case all comments by @6065 have been deleted, which removes the basis from under comments by other users. This user cannot even reply to unnamed superuser's last comment justifying their (gender neutral singular pronoun) most recent deletions, knowing any reply will be deleted as soon as unnamed superuser takes another look. Below find 2 of user6065's comments which have been stored in anticipation of deletions. Reply to unnamed superuser's most recent comment: Where is the blame? user6065 did not blame any other user or superuser, user6065 merely finds it hard to understand why comments even those in Chinese have been deleted.It is true that moderator-superuser has suggested avoiding comments when answers are possible. However relatively short pieces of information are allowed as comments by other users, but in the case of user6065 unnamed superuser insists on deleting them. Please note that for almost 4 years user has been allowed to write comments even though they could have been written as answers. It seems some degree of discretion is allowed and moderator seems to be much more sympathetic than unnamed superuser who may not even be an expert on the Chinese language. Thus comments have generally been accepted and not even been hidden (before being deleted by unnamed superuser).

看起来拥有可疑中文专门知识的超级用户称"标示"的行动简单地意味着删除而已,换句话说对于该超级用户标示就是等同于删除而已。请注意关于"标示"某答案的规则,为了删除掉某答案必须受到标示至少四次而需要有四名拥有特权用户提出的理由。按照一些用户看法值得忆起的是网站管理员所以把本用户某些评论删除掉了是认为相关评论应该撰作成答案。关于用户与线上词典可不可以互影响的问题好象有用户不知道或者不注意到(也可能是懒得周密地查看)词典条目是提供的许多解释意义与用法的示例短语。

补充说明:好象起码有两名删除者而上面受到删除的评论好象是让上述最初提到一位超级用户删除的。因此(并且为了会适当地判断在讨论中的本用户所写作的评论)请注意到,该评论缩短的含义:属于语法问题:出差去:"去"是趋向补语,"去出差"是连动句, 关于"了",趋向补语"去,来"等等后面可以有动态助词"了"和"过",因此 "去出差了"也是可以的,然而正如网上搜索显示了,"出差去了"的利用频度比"去出差了"大得多了。用户最害怕的事情就是以上的讨论很可能会更进一步促使第一名超级用户把本用户将来所有评论都删除掉了(作为一个例子请看以下的问题"吃 and 在吃")。

6
  • 1
    The comments got deleted because of the content, without reflection on any particular user; e.g. irrelevant to the post, trying to provide an answer, etc. So trying to improve the contents would be the only solution to avoid being flagged and deletion. – user4072 Jun 19 '19 at 8:10
  • Something strange seems to be happening,that is to say 2 of user's earlier comments have reappeared, but comments in Chinese (see above) are still missing (which each were awarded a +1 mark by other users, is this the reason they were not allowed to reappear?) In response to unnamed superuser: user is not blaming any moderator, but is merely complaining. – user6065 Jun 19 '19 at 9:16
  • 1
    Sorry I can't get which comments you meant have reappeared, but I'm sure the comments showed in your question should stay being deleted; they're just complaining about why the comments got deleted, which has nothing to do with the question itself. As I said above, they got deleted because of the content; the only solution is trying to improve the quality. – user4072 Jun 19 '19 at 9:20
  • when writing above question to Meta (as is stated in question to Meta) all of user\s comments had been deleted. At present the 2 comments written by user that can still be seen at the Chinese site are the ones that have reappeared (so that users may understand the replies which were never deleted). Of course all these have nothing to do with the question itself. – user6065 Jun 19 '19 at 9:30
  • 1
    Maybe they just still don't catch moderators' attention. If we notice them, or someone raised a falg to catch the moderator's attention, and they should be deleted, then they'll be deleted. That's why we need users' flags to help us to improve the site. – user4072 Jun 19 '19 at 9:36
  • 1
    “Relatively short comments by other users” are deleted all the time by moderators and flagged by other users for deletion. You wouldn’t know this, because (1) you don’t keep track of other users’ comments which have been deleted, and (2) other users don’t care that their comments are deleted. The premise of this question is unsound, please look at how many of your comments still remain on Chinese SE, and appreciate that it is extremely unreasonable to leave that many comments as attempts at answering. Again, have a look at other SE sites to see if anyone does the same as you. – dROOOze Jun 19 '19 at 19:04
2

Your comments that have been deleted were first flagged by others as:

It's no longer needed.
This comment is outdated, conversational or not relevant to this post.

They then showed up on the moderator queue where they were deleted.


You might want to review when you should comment and when you should not comment.

Help Center > Privileges > comment everywhere

When should I comment?

You should submit a comment if you want to:

  • Request clarification from the author;
  • Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;
  • Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).

When shouldn't I comment?

Comments are not recommended for any of the following:

  • Suggesting corrections that don't fundamentally change the meaning of the post; instead, make or suggest an edit;

  • Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one);

  • Compliments which do not add new information ("+1, great answer!"); instead, upvote it and pay it forward;

  • Criticisms which do not add anything constructive ("-1, see previous comments you scallywag!"); instead, downvote (and provide or upvote a better answer if appropriate);

  • Secondary discussion or debating a controversial point; please use chat instead;

  • Discussion of community behavior or site policies; please use meta instead.

2

TL;DR: Comments are temporary: comments in general (and particularly comment floods) are regularly deleted throughout Stack Exchange. Answering in comments is a misuse of the site and often indicates low-quality answers. In this case, there's also issues of potential plagiarism.

If you want your answers-in-comments to stay, I suggest converting them into answers; don't expect diamond moderators to bend the rules for you in particular.


You're essentially requesting that diamond moderators allow you to have a unique privilege to "answer using multiple comments", a privilege not given to any other user anywhere on Stack Exchange. Literally even the CEO of Stack Exchange does not have this privilege. Nobody does. The answer is surely no.

This puts your answers-in-comments above actual answers, prevents users from downvoting them, and inhibits other answerers. It violates one of the most fundamental aspects of Stack Exchange:

Good answers are voted up and rise to the top.
The best answers show up first so that they are always easy to find.
Welcome to Chinese Language Stack Exchange

We're not talking about a user tentatively answering in comments because their unsure the question might be immediately edited afterwards. We're talking about years of flooding the site with comments. We're also talking about comments which are primarily copy/paste from a dictionary, which raises issues of plagiarism.

user3306356♦'s answer talks about how these comments are being flagged by users, which is unsurprising: I'm among those who flag "noise" in comments. It's important to note: diamond moderators don't need to wait until flags arrive to fix problems, nor should they. Judging from your answer, you seem unclear on what comments and flags are for:

Flagging a comment: ...
- no longer needed - the comment is obsolete, chatty, or otherwise unnecessary

When shouldn't I comment? ...
- Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one);

Comments are referred to as "second-class citizens"; they exist as a support for questions and answers:

Comments are second class citizens on the Stack Exchange network, not designed to hold information for all eternity. They may get cleaned up at any time. Generally, truly important information should be incorporated into an answer anyway ...
Pekka, meta.SE


I come from Islam.SE, where answering in comments is exploited to circumvent the usual peer-review:

I have seen many users use comments to post answers explicitly because they're trying to avoid downvotes ... this is usually a very good sign that the poster doesn't actually trust his own answer ...
goldPseudo♦

And regarding the copy/paste issue, at Islam.SE we'd say...

We don't want to become a repository of quotes from elsewhere.
Manishearth

Both these apply here; in short, this is not normal behavior at Stack Exchange.


Responding...

in this case all comments by @6065 have been deleted

Comment deletion is normal.

...any reply will be deleted as soon as unnamed superuser takes another look

This reply at meta (the appropriate outlet) has not been deleted.

If you have a problem with a diamond moderator action, it can be brought up with Stack Exchange (I believe the email address is team@stackexchange.com). But in this instance, I'm certain Stack Exchange instructions will be the obvious: don't allow such misuse of comments. If Stack Exchange staff were aware of this, they may even delete the mess of comments themselves (like they did at Islam.SE).

It is true that moderator-superuser has suggested avoiding comments when answers are possible.

Listen to that advice. Answers go in the box labelled "Your Answer". It's simple.

in the case of user6065 unnamed superuser insists on deleting them

The comments flood the site!! They absolutely need deletion. Even non-flood non-copy/paste comments get deleted; it's normal.

Please note that for almost 4 years user has been allowed to write comments even though they could have been written as answers.
After almost 4 years, when comments were consistently allowed ...

If this is accurate, they were overlooked. (Didn't you look around and think "no-one else is answering questions using streams of comments?") In any case, these comment floods need cleaning up: comments are temporary, so if you want them to remain, I suggest writing answers like everyone else.

It seems submitting question to Meta was the only way to get comments readmitted at the Chinese site.

You're looking at this wrong: comments get deleted. If you want to save them, turn them into answers.

Users have endeavoured to answer questions without being rewarded by any increase in reputation.

You could simply ignore reputation. Otherwise, creating bounties is the usual way of getting rid of undesired reputation.

-1

Users would like to express thanks to Meta for causing reinstatement at least 2 comments (present until last week of June, they meanwhile have disappeared along with other users' comments which do not concern language) at the Chinese language site, which were written in response to other comments at this site and which gave rise to further comments by other users. Present title merely complained about the impossibility of replying to comments by other users at the particular question because they were immediately deleted. Users appreciate Meta giving consideration to this matter and causing restoration of deleted comments. Users seem to have reason to suspect Meta moderator may have suggested to deleting (wide range, see below) superuser to retrieve deleted comments from recycle bin (or its equivalent) and move them back to where they were originally posted. It seems submitting question to Meta was the only way to get comments readmitted at the Chinese site. Therefore the question appears to be justified and markdown is noted with deep regret. As far as deleting comments pertaining to Chinese Language questions are concerned, most given reasons do not seem to apply to the situation under discussion. After almost 4 years, when comments were consistently allowed, even though they could have been written as answers Chinese language moderator indicated possible future deletion. Users have endeavoured to answer questions without being rewarded by any increase in reputation. Some users consider it an expression of modesty and self-depreciation to write comments instead of answers and therefore have welcomed the practice. During all this time none of users' comments was ever deleted and although there were other users' invitations to make comment into an answer with the prospect of awarding an upvote, these were ignored. There was no mention of flagging. In fact users wonder how flagging of comments might work in practice. Users have seen instances of questions being flagged (and by the way, do not recall ever seeing any answer flagged) and almost always flags did not reach required number 4 for deletion, furthermore users often rephrased question resulting in removal of flags. Regarding deletion of comments by other than their authors, when there has been a back and forth between users dwelling on the same topic for too long (which does not really happen very often at least at the Chinese site), users have been warned to stop writing comments or move the discussion to chat site, after which comments have ceased to appear which most likely has been due to no more comments being submitted rather than being deleted. Of course comments also have been hidden without being deleted. Users tend to conclude that in the present case "flagging" is simply synonymous or at best simultaneous with decision to delete comment by Chinese language moderator. It seems deletion of particular comments, because they could have been answers is entirely due to above-mentioned decision by Chinese language moderator, another superuser (moderator) with range of activity extending over several (possibly all) stack exchange (Q&A) sites seems to have then used such individual cases as a blank check to delete any comment by users in question, as soon as they see it. Again thanks for reversing 2 such deletions in the present case! (Note final comment confirming deletion without flagging by last-named (wide range) moderator at the Chinese language site, present until last week of June, which by now also has disappeared, because not involving Chinese language). As history of Chinese language site during last 4 years seems to confirm Chinese language moderator has considerable leeway to allow comments which could be answers. It only remains for users to express heartfelt thanks for the great favour of having for almost 4 years allowed comments even though they could have been answers.

关于以下文字请留意用户并不太熟悉什么标点符号规则. 用户很想感谢Meta已经使得起码两篇评论归还中文问答网站了(后者六月的最后一周以前在中文问答网站还存在).该篇评论提供之所以是为对其他用户的评论做回应,而接着又引起了另外一些评论。本问题的标题只是投诉有超级用户紧接地把所有本用户评论都删除掉了所以不可能回答别用户的评论。看起来事情受到Meta的兼顾而结果是起码部分删除的评论归还了.好象有理由怀疑某位Meta管理员向进行删除的(大范围,请见以下)超级用户建议把删除掉的评论从"回收筒"(或类似存储设备)找回,并送回到其原来安放的位置.使该评论再次在中文网站出现唯一的办法好象就是向Meta提出问题.因此本问题似乎完全合理而用户遗憾地注意到对其进行了扣分.就在中文问答网站删除评论而言,提出的理由好象丝毫不适用于讨论下的事情.近4年始终允许评论起回答问题的作用以后,中文管理员突然透露的这种评论会删除的。用户在不得到增加名声奖励的情况下竭力了回答问题.有用户认为写出评论而不是答案是种谦逊跟自我贬低的表现,所以值得赞成的。在这段时间里没有用户任何一篇评论受到删除。尽管有用户建议把评论变成答案,给人以好评的指望被用户故意无视了。并没有提及什么标旗贴在评论上.其实用户很想知道贴上标旗在实践中会怎样实施的。用户已见过在答案贴上标旗的事例(顺便提一下,用户想不起来有任何向答案贴上标旗的情况),然而标旗的数量通常没有到达为删除所需要的数字4。另外用户通常会改撰问题的,并这样把任何标旗除去掉了.就评论被自己以外的用户给除去而言,当在讨论某种问题来回来去的时候(尽管在中文问答网站不太经常出现的),他们就受到劝告,要么不再写出评论,要么把讨论到聊天网站般。然后这些评论再没有出现,而最可能的解释就是再没有提供而不是删除了评论。当然隐藏而不是删除某个评论并非罕见.在目前这个情况下用户倾向于得出结论如此,"贴上标旗"和中文管理员所进行删除的决定是同义或顶多同时的。换句话说,删除可算是答案个别评论应全部归于中文管理员的决定.另外一位超级用户(管理员)其活动范围可能涵盖几个问答网站(也许所有的)就把个别由中文管理员处理删除评论的情况用作赋予自己删除相关用户所有提供评论的权利,甚至于只一看到就可以即时删除。再次感謝Meta把两篇评论的除掉扭转了.(直到六月的最后一周为止,在中文问答网站还存在已经提及(大范围)超级用户所写出的评论证实有被删除评论而没有贴上标旗(自己所处理)的情况),因为没涉及中文的,目前已经也消失了).正如中文问答网站的历史好象证实的那样,中文问答网站的管理员具有相当大的回旋余地来允许答案进入网站作评论.只剩下表示衷心的感谢近四年把可算是答案允许作评论,这种恩惠.

0

You must log in to answer this question.

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