I wrote an answer that was received so-so. Apparently, I gave some readers, among them the moderator anongoodnurse, the impression that I wasn't particularly nice to my son and was recommending it as general advice.

anongoodnurse wrote a comment with fairly bold, judgemental language:

"I hope this was written tongue in cheek, but its self-serving attitude fits well with the whole of your answer. You can't "authentically" love a child while totally rejecting discussing things that they love and letting them know that you are not interested at all. And to hug your child just before you crush their spirit is just so creepy to me."

I think the language and overall direction of this comment does not become a moderator.

When I responded, they said "this is not the place for discussion", to which I said "Hey, you started it! :-)": It seems unfair for a moderator to make a remark and then claim the last word by moderator fiat.

After other users read the answer differently than I had intended, I edited the answer, quoting anongoodnurse's own objection, which I addressed, in order to prevent the mis-readings.

anongoodnurse deleted my quoting her, I reverted and left a comment why, they locked the answer.

I have never engaged in an "edit war" and find it childish. But I am frankly pissed at anongoodnurse: You cannot criticize as an ordinary user in this fairly blunt and judgemental way and then have the last word by way of your moderator privileges. That seems not OK to me.

I'd also like to have your opinions whether my quoting was out of line (the venerable Rory Alsop seems to think so). anongoodnurse said in a comment "And yours was a direct attack on me, something I did not do." I feel exactly the other way around: I simply quoted a part of the comment, with attribution, which I indeed did perceive as a personal attack. I quoted the comment because it, however bold, expressed what I perceived as a mis-reading of my answer. I then made clear that that is not what I suggest, in order to prevent similar mis-readings. I did not alter the comment or say anything about it except that that was not what I wanted to say. The use was entirely ad rem. That quote certainly cannot be more of an attack than the original comment, for purely logical reasons.

  • 2
    Heh. Just checked in on meta to see whether there were others who found the moderation here to be a bit overreaching, and sure enough... I'm not up to speed on your particular question and don't know whom I'd agree with in the case at hand, but this site is micro managed like no other site in the network that I know of. Just throwing that in as support, not keen to entertain a discussion either way. I'm done here for exactly the same reasons.
    – user36162
    Commented Mar 7, 2023 at 20:11

1 Answer 1


You are misrepresenting the issue. I did not call you out as a bad parent; I thought the advice you gave was not wise. You asked me why I reacted strongly and I answered. The answer is up, the comments are in the chat room. People can read for themselves (hopefully recognizing the spin you're putting on it).

I did not intervene until you called me "the belligerent mod" in one of your comments, and quoted me inappropriately in an edit to score an unnecessary dig. I've removed nothing of consequence except the dig in your post. Which you rolled back. I left everything else intact.

If you like logic, you might recognize the difference between an opinion about your answer and your ad hominem. Also, meta is supposed to be about issues, not people. Making this about you vs. me is not how meta should be used.

You've violated the "Be Nice" policy. I ran this by the other mods for an assessment lest I be out of line. I was assured most positively that I was not. Had there been disagreement, I would have been made aware.

  • 2
    Well: (1) You were belligerent ("inclined to or exhibiting assertiveness, hostility, or combativeness" according to Merriam-Webster, which describes your comment quite to the point). And the quote of your comment in my edited answer was neither inappropriate nor unnecessary. I quoted your own reading of the first version of my answer (!) and said "of course we don't want to do that" in order to prevent similar mis-readings. That is appropriate and necessary. Commented Jan 22, 2023 at 2:23
  • 2
    (2) You didn't say "not wise", you said "creepy". And because I explicitly based my advice on the experience with my son, such a label implicitly calls me out as a bad parent as well. And "self-serving attitude" is an unwarranted ad personam tag. Commented Jan 22, 2023 at 2:25
  • 2
    (3) My take is that you didn't like yourself being quoted there because you didn't like your own writing that much at second thought, edited it out and want to prevent me from editing it back in. Commented Jan 22, 2023 at 2:29
  • 1
    I have no problem with what I wrote; if I had regretted it, I would have deleted it. I said I was sure you you meant no ill will. You have not given me the the same benefit of the doubt. Commented Jan 22, 2023 at 3:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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