I certainly appreciate that you apologized openly but that was a comment you made in the guise of "Site Moderator". Those comments sometimes come with corrective actions, and are specifically meant to shape behavior. They have been used to shape MY behavior.
I'm pretty sure I've been chided before for making a drive by comment on this site, but that seems to have been the case here, in your official role.
>On the other hand, other people would probably have misread it in the same way, so the point still applies, just not as much, and probably not enough to justify my mod response.
>At first I read it as a gratuitous Holocaust reference (i.e. some sort of throwaway flamebait)
Part of my response is that I cannot fathom even a little bit the way you mistakenly read the comment in such a way, unless you just barely even see the comments you are moderating. Was this driven by a "concentration camp" auto-moderator or something?
It's frustrating how often we are told to trust that you moderate fairly, that any concerns we have are just "sampling bias" or confirmation bias, that we can't really discuss or doubt the rules, that definitely no vote manipulation happens, but we also cannot expect you to read the sentence containing the supposed reference?
I'm pretty sure I've been chided before for making a drive by comment on this site, but that seems to have been the case here, in your official role.
>On the other hand, other people would probably have misread it in the same way, so the point still applies, just not as much, and probably not enough to justify my mod response.
>At first I read it as a gratuitous Holocaust reference (i.e. some sort of throwaway flamebait)
Part of my response is that I cannot fathom even a little bit the way you mistakenly read the comment in such a way, unless you just barely even see the comments you are moderating. Was this driven by a "concentration camp" auto-moderator or something?
It's frustrating how often we are told to trust that you moderate fairly, that any concerns we have are just "sampling bias" or confirmation bias, that we can't really discuss or doubt the rules, that definitely no vote manipulation happens, but we also cannot expect you to read the sentence containing the supposed reference?
IDK, man, I was just surprised.