#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES FOR FREE#
#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES UPDATE#
#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES FULL#
#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES CODE#

But at least in a few cases, it was not limited to that. If that was limited to rude, offensive and trolling stuff, there would be no problem. Some comments and answers have been deleted on some places. However, many people see that SE is acting in a very hostile manner to at least part of their moderators. So, people expect that at least, SE treats moderators in a friendly way.

#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES FOR FREE#

Moderators are people that work hard to SE for free and without them everything would fail. Normally, they are very slow into implementing new stuff. Many people wonder why SE is in such a hurry to put on that new CoC with so little input from the community. Now, many people are thinking that they are consciously choosing to not be transparent and that they are hiding something really nasty. Most people thought that this was due to laziness, negligence or lack of organization. It is very hard to build trust in that way and this tends to just produces even more frustration, fear, anger and mistrust.ДЇor years, people were complaining about SE's lack of transparency.

There are hundreds of questions in meta about the CoC, but it is very rare to see any feedback from SE staff or CMs other than deleting stuff and suspending people. It opens the doors for trolls use gender and LGBTQI+ self-identity stuff to induce other people to do things that they otherwise would not do or else force them get into trouble. Some people argue that the new CoC is a hell for moderators and a heaven for trolls. Definitely, that is not how the community is.

#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES FULL#

Some people think that SE presents its community as a place full of bigots and fascists that should be expelled and purified by force. And most users don't think that SE sincerely care anything about that. Most people think that the way that SE fired Monica was definitely unethical and unfair at best. No honest person likes to be forced to tell a lie. Of course that free speech is not an excuse to be rude or to say horrible things, but it is definitely subverted if people are forced to voice something even if they really don't believe nor agree on it. However, the new CoC seems to compel people to tell things even if they don't believe in it, so there is no free speech anymore. Even because there can't be true self-determination if there is no free speech. People tend to value free speech more than self-determination. Nobody would like to get suspended or banned in a witch-hunt just for asking for some clarification, for committing some silly mistake or even for not saying something. There are a lot of gray areas and uncertainties. Many people think that the new CoC is a minefield. This would mean that the meta simply would lose most of its purpose of even existing. Many people think that SE are simply ignoring any input or feedback from people on meta. Many people see SE as an entity that keeps telling lies to the users. As if we are an obsolete product that they need to get rid of or as if our whole role now is to just click the ads that they push to us. Some people think that SE seems to not care anymore about the community. Most of the reasons why people won't calm down are:

#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES UPDATE#

Please judge the CoC update on its own merits, rather than on the context. The CoC can be bad while the demodding is fair, or vice versa. That issue, although related to the CoC update, is distinct from the handling of the demodding. Yes, there are decisions by Stack Exchange that many are unhappy about, in particular about the handling and communication surrounding the demodding of a moderator whose work many users were happy with. Whether this is coerced speech or not and whether this is good or bad, let's not make a storm in a teacup out of this update.

#A STORM IN A TEACUP EXAMPLES CODE#

Highly upvoted posts are speaking of coerced speech and users resigning.ДЄpart from the fact that nobody is coerced into participating in Stack Exchange and that for that reason alone there is no coerced speech, apart from the soft coercion that is universal in society, can we please separate the Code of Conduct update from the way this has been handled? An awful lot has been written about it already. With the firing of community managers, I no longer believe this is a storm in a teacup.Дear friends across the Stack Exchange network.Д¬an we please calm down a bit about the Code of Conduct update?ДЄs of, the Code of Conduct Update had 424 upvotes and 2229 downvotes.

A storm in a teacup examples