-10

There was a question, that recently closed as too broad.

So far, so good — but there's more to it! I've had an answer, now surrounded by red square with a title deleted. It's the only deleted answer — other ones left as is (at least as I can see).

I'd think it was for a reason, but there's no comment indicating who or why would remove it — nothing. But…! Of all answers, mine is the single having also a label locked by, and it's by Community!

So, someone anonymously deleted my answer — but why? I don't remember an engagement against someone on unix.se, so it's probably a person with another intention.

Ah, btw, why was the question closed?

There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.

Aha! Here we go: my answer did exactly this — it narrowed down possible issues of the question to a small neat list, and answered them one-by-one.

In conclusion: someone decided to close the question, but my answer put up a danger of rejecting the vote (it was on the top because of votes). So the user deleted my answer before casting the vote.

Someone having dirty politics out here, and we want to know the hero, aren't we? 😉

  • 8
    Nobody can delete an answer anonymously. There is no nefarious scheme against you, nobody is out to get you. I suggest that next time something happens which you don't understand, you ask about it instead of accusing people of bad intent. – terdon Nov 28 '16 at 11:20
  • @terdon isn't that what I did? – Hi-Angel Nov 28 '16 at 12:42
  • 1
    Not quite. You set out to attack, not ask for clarification. That's certainly how your post comes across, anyway. Using terms like "dirty politics", deciding that there was ill intent (the user removed my answer to validate their decision to close), comes across as very aggressive. Next time, avoid making assumptions or throwing blame around and just ask why your question was deleted. As muru explained, this was all automatic and nothing personal. – terdon Nov 28 '16 at 12:46
  • @terdon how is that aggressive, I'm just unfolding the clues. Imagine yourself in my place — what else would you think with all that in hand, and without knowing about broken internals of rejecting/mirgration on SE (and, given you knew, that the answer already migrated previously, and it is here, "deleted", right in front of your eyes, so definitely you wouldn't look back at askubuntu)…? – Hi-Angel Nov 28 '16 at 13:02
  • 4
    You thought you were being attacked and it turned out you're wrong. All I'm saying is that, next time, you might want to consider the possibility that nobody did anything wrong. So, instead of accusing people of "dirty politics", you could have simply asked "what happened here". That's all. – terdon Nov 28 '16 at 13:36
  • @terdon I considered the possibility that nobody did anything wrong. But do clues accord to that? How high the probability that it's simply a bug in the site? | Anyway, the downvotes — as is my life experience in general — shows that most peoples don't like when someone "think too much". You should encourage the rational thinking instead of what everyone usually do. | end of rant. – Hi-Angel Nov 28 '16 at 16:13
  • 1
    I am trying to encourage rational thinking. That's why I suggested you don't throw blame around without knowing what actually happened. – terdon Nov 28 '16 at 16:15
  • @terdon one of rules of a good question — did you do everything you could to find the possible cause? If I'd just put the clues out, and ask why did this happen — it's akin to ask "something didn't work, here'n'there logs, help!" — the first question in general "what have you try? Google shows a bunch of topics with alike error" (may be not exact wording — more likely the question just going to be ignored). So, what did I try? I made a research, and it should be encouraged — even if in the end I turned out to be wrong. – Hi-Angel Nov 28 '16 at 16:25
  • you're missing the point. This may be a language issue, I am trying to explain that the tone of your post is aggressive. It's great that you did research and there's absolutely nothing wrong with making a mistake. What is wrong, is accusing people before knowing what happened. Also note that you can only see your own deleted answers, you need 10k rep to see all deleted posts. – terdon Nov 28 '16 at 16:33
  • To be honest, I still don't understand: basically, you suggested to not tell about the research, because it may offend someone (then again, given that "the user" doesn't even exist, who could be offended?). I don't know, may be it's about priorities — I'd say research is more important than someone's opinion… But I have to stop arguing, because it's a recurring problem of my communication with peoples: I always do something seemingly right, and then I'm told by everyone it's wrong, for reasons that are never clear to me. – Hi-Angel Nov 28 '16 at 18:31
  • 2
    @hi-angel - all terdon is saying Is to not assume the worst. Inquire without assuming it was done with any malice directed towards you. – slm Nov 29 '16 at 14:18
10

Don't be unnecessarily dramatic. Your answer was originally on Ask Ubuntu, from where this post was migrated here. When a post is migrated, it is deleted and locked on the original site. When the question got closed, the migration was rejected, so the original post was undeleted. Therefore, your post here was deleted, since it now exists (undeleted) on Ask Ubuntu.

Since the other answers were posted here, they remain here instead of being deleted. Each answer only exists in one site, which is fair.

  • Oh, indeed, that's interesting. So, now there exist two answers, one on the askubuntu, and the other one — deleted — on unix.se, and both with different set of commetns and votes. Wow, that's some broken scheme! But anyway, I'm glad that it's another situation where I should've applied Hanlons' Razor – Hi-Angel Nov 28 '16 at 12:46
7

As a "meta" answer (independent of muru's actual answer), mostly in response to the comment string, I continue to learn new ways in which this site works. Often times, it's something that's already been asked and answered on either meta.unix.stackexchange.com or meta.stackexchange.com. I can see how your situation would have been confusing, but I think the point that terdon was trying to make is that after your research, you used phrases in your meta Question like:

Dirty politics of some high-rep user

someone anonymously deleted my answer

so it's probably a person with another intention

In conclusion: someone decided to close the question

So the user deleted my answer before casting the (closing) vote

which sounds like you're assuming ill-intent on the part of another user, and doesn't allow for an understanding of a way in which the site might be working that's surprising to you.

As a suggestion, ask a question with only the facts that you're directly aware of and with the part that confused you. In my experience, most of the activities on this site are logged with the person's name, so there's not much chance for anonymous activity (beyond up & down-voting, I suppose).

  • I think we're diverging in a thought process for the particular problem. I'm not "assuming ill-intent" for no reason, but I led by research to conclusions. Suppose, I didn't make the assumption: then it all stop on the second paragraph (the 3-rd goes "someone anonymously deleted the answer"), and then it's not even a research, but bare facts. If you've read the comment wall, you know — it came down to 2 camps: α) me assuming importance of research over opinions, and β) terdon ♦ (and, judging by votes, pretty much everyone) assuming the reverse. Both are subjective, there's not much to add. – Hi-Angel Nov 29 '16 at 5:21
  • 3
    @Hi-Angel it's not about research. It is about the way you chose to describe your research. Your word choices, especially the ones highlighted in Jeff's answer, set the tone of your question. And that tone is confrontational. That's what we're trying to explain. You didn't just present your research, you also provided an interpretation. That is analysis, not research and that wasn't helpful here. So yes, next time, stick to the data alone and don't add your interpretation of other people's motives. – terdon Nov 29 '16 at 9:52
  • @terdon nobody is out to get you you said. Let me show: I've just got a downvote on unix.se to a perfectly fine question (with research, logs, all that, kinda surprising answer, and low views). That was definitely for what I asked on meta, not for the question itself. See: my assumption for malicious intention was — besides clues — based on a vast life experience. Even though I'm somewhat younger than you, I have reasons to assume my experience in that kind greater than yours. But your assumption is based on belief in people. I've had one too, and I learned to drop it in really hard way. – Hi-Angel Nov 29 '16 at 21:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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