9

I recently came across a post that had some possibly offensive text that was serving no purpose and was just "noise", so I went ahead and flagged the post for moderator attention. I'm not sure if the flag was accepted or not, but a couple minutes later I noticed a moderator removed the text from the post.

I went back a couple minutes later and noticed that the user had added the text back in. So I decided to suggest an edit and the post was instead edited by another user with higher rep than I have. Then again the user changed the post back.

Finally, I decided to again suggest another edit (which probably wasn't the best idea now that I think about it), and the edit was accepted by two users but then rejected by the owner of the offensive post with the reason there is no offense here. I am expressing my opinion.

I then checked other answers by the user and noticed some of them had the same text in them (see here[link is now dead..nevermind, the posts were all unlocked.]). So I flagged two of the answers explaining why I had flagged them and stating that there were other answers and the user refused to have the posts edited.

So my question is, was that the right thing to do? (I'm a little nervous now that the user might downvote me, since he knows who was trying to edit his post.) So what should I do about users who put controversial/religious or other offensive text in their posts for no apparent reason? Thanks for helping me clear this up.

Note: I am a Christian (so the text could be viewed as good or bad or neutral to me), so it's not so much about the content of the post, but the irrelevance of it (and the refusal to remove it after a mod did).

Improve this question
26
  • 16
    Jesus Christ ...
    – user102937
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:18
  • 9
    Is it really offensive ? " thanks to Jesus Christ!"
    – Habib
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:18
  • 6
    I don't really consider it offensive, but the last thing you should do is start an editwar. Just flag the post again and stay out of it if the user rollbacks an edit made by a moderator.
    – Jeroen Vannevel
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:19
  • Well, I mean, it could be (it bothered me a little). And it's completely unnecessary. But my question is more "what should I do with something like this (like if the text is much worse)" and "Did I handle this situation correctly?"
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:20
  • I agree that it's unnecessary in this context. not offensive, just looks funny
    – Caffeinated
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:21
  • 15
    I would personally have removed it simply because it adds nothing and is noise. I don't see how it could possibly be seen as offensive.
    – Servy
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:22
  • @Servy, that is most of the reason I removed it. I'll edit my question to clarify that.
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:23
  • 20
    There are three users called Jesus Christ I see. Maybe he read an answer by one of them and was just giving attribution.
    – McNab
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:25
  • @McNab, he had that in more than one post.
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:27
  • 4
    @Habib - its noise
    – Caffeinated
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:32
  • 1
    i have no idea why they rejected that edit ... anyways i have edited answer
    – NullPoiиteя
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:58
  • 4
    If you get offended by "Jesus Christ" you should probably step away from those situations.
    – Kermit
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 18:12
  • 3
    It wasn't so much I was offended, I just saw no need for the text.
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 18:12
  • 1
    He appears to accept his own answers to his questions more often than anyone; I understand this is acceptable, but the ratio is surely odd.
    – Dan Lugg
    Commented Feb 22, 2014 at 4:30
  • 2
    The idea of the Lord God whispering Ajax tips into this fellow's ear is extraordinarily humorous.
    – Ernest Friedman-Hill
    Commented Feb 23, 2014 at 3:49

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
22

Don't get into an edit war. If you feel that a post is inappropriate, edit it, and it is rolled back, the flag the post, and don't edit it again. A moderator will be able to resolve the issue in ways that you simply cannot.

Given that the mod's edit was rolled back you should have simply flagged the post again, not edited it. If they feel that it's warranted, they can lock the post after editing it to prevent future edits.

Improve this answer
8
  • Okay, I wasn't sure if moderators could lock an edit like that. I did flag it after the user rejected my edit.
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:22
  • 3
    @davidsbro It's also key to stop editing the post. At that point you're just contributing to the problem, not the solution. Back away.
    – Servy
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:23
  • 4
    after the second edit I realized I was just digging myself into a hole and so stopped. But you're right, next time I won't get as involved as I did this time.
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 18, 2014 at 17:25
  • 3
    @davidsbro Looks like the OP of the answer is more than willing to continue the rollback war... :)
    – Mysticial
    Commented Feb 22, 2014 at 0:32
  • Yeah, wow. Do you know why it was unlocked?
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 22, 2014 at 0:47
  • @davidsbro I think it was only put on a timed locked that expired after an hour.
    – Mysticial
    Commented Feb 22, 2014 at 0:49
  • 1
    @Mysticial, So should the mods relock it? He appears to have put the text in more than one answer now... stackoverflow.com/search?q=jesus%20user:1081753
    – davidsbro
    Commented Feb 22, 2014 at 0:50
  • 3
    Just flag one of the posts and explain the situation. They'll do what they need to do.
    – Mysticial
    Commented Feb 22, 2014 at 0:54

You must log in to answer this question.

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