How come that three or two people destroy my questions they know nothing of, shamelessly aknowledging their ignorance?

My point is that if we see statistics it means that only three or two persons downvote my questions systematically. Some of them have even dared to label me as 'patient' and use other terms.

This is pure mobbing as such. If I cannot learn here or if they don't understand my questions, what's the point to use the site then?

Looks like Russian 'science' haven't changed much since Lysenko's or Marr's days.

| |
  • Can you please, be more clear, what exactly you are asking about or what exactly do you want to discuss? – shabunc Jan 21 '13 at 14:02

How do you know who's downvoting you? You can't know that, so you can't know if it's the same "two or three" people that are downvoting you. Not even moderators can see who voted for who, so I'm afraid that's just speculation.

That said, when you get downvoted or your questions get closed, check them:

  • Are they On Topic? Are they about Russian language and its usage?
  • Are they clear? Is it clear what you're asking?
  • Are they reasonably scoped? If you're asking for many things or for something "large" then it's too broad.

And so on.

If your answer is yes to all of these questions than you're on the right track and your question would be most likely upvoted. If it gets downvoted anyway, you can open a Meta question like this one and avoiding personal attacks, ask what is wrong with it and what you can do to improve it.

I can assure you that users will help you, I certainly will try to help you and I'm sure other users will as well.

| |
  • Well, I don't care about downvoting my particular questions & answers, but I go really mad when someone tries to impose his or her ideas about 'constructive behaviour' so bluntly insisting on my return to university age. So, answering your question, the problem is about closing a new question, which is done by downvoting with specific names of downvoters. – Manjusri Jan 21 '13 at 19:02
  • @Manjusri Sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean with your comment. Can you rephrase it? Thanks. – Alenanno Jan 21 '13 at 19:28
  • They want names and addresses. :) Clearly, it ain’t me, because I only downvoted them once. :) – theUg Jan 21 '13 at 19:32
  • Well, I have set some questions which are now closed by three persons. – Manjusri Jan 23 '13 at 20:09
  • 3
    @Manjusri Well, regardless of who they are, they gained their privilege and this means they can vote. Now, if you think a question was wrongly closed, open a Meta question (one per question please) saying why you think it should be open. We can discuss on it and if you're right, I'll reopen them right away (that's how it works, after all). Just one thing: please avoid personal attacks and adopt a friendlier tone. If you don't do that, it will be counterproductive and go against you even if you're right. Hope this helps. – Alenanno Jan 24 '13 at 9:39
  • @Alenanno Thank you for the advice. I cannot speak friendly to them, but I shall try to take a neutral tone whenever possible. Getting a privilige just because of hanging around is definatly a wrong strategy to promote the site. All in all, this resembles a lot Russian management style, when decisions are maid by non-professionals 'just because they are getting the privilege'. – Manjusri Jan 24 '13 at 10:32
  • 2
    @Manjusri Privileges are gained through reputation. You're not assigned a privilege, you gain it by yourself by contributing to the site. I think you made some wrong assumptions there. – Alenanno Jan 24 '13 at 11:04
  • @Alenanno And reputation here is gained thru relations and vulgar populism. My point is that reputation worths nothing unless it is based on some intuitive knowledge of the subject. They don't understand the essance of my questions. Just forms and formalities, so I have to разжевывать the obvious things which is time-taking. Seriously, I don't know how to talk to persons demanding me to be ignorant just like themselves. They read and know nothing. – Manjusri Feb 4 '13 at 7:47
  • @Manjusri You don't know what qualifications other users have. But we all know that attacking people personally won't solve things and I'm referring to everyone, not just you. We're here to cooperate and I must remind you (and everyone else) that there is a Be nice rule in the FAQ. So let's all be nice. [continues] – Alenanno Feb 4 '13 at 10:07
  • @Manjusri [continued] If your questions are downvoted, perhaps this is not the right site for your questions. This doesn't mean your questions are bad or something like that. Perhaps they're great questions, but maybe there are better sites for them. For example, your questions are all Linguistic in nature, have you considered asking on Linguistics? Read the FAQ there before posting, but I'm quite sure it'd be a better site for some of your questions. – Alenanno Feb 4 '13 at 10:08
  • Since they don't care about my qualifucation, why should I bother with theirs? – Manjusri Feb 4 '13 at 10:10
  • But it's very strange that nobody can properly evaluate a linguistic question on a site related to language. – Manjusri Feb 4 '13 at 10:11
  • @Manjusri Have you read all of my comment or just the first line? It's not strange: this site is about the current language mostly. But there's Linguistics: there you can ask historical questions as much as you want. :) – Alenanno Feb 4 '13 at 10:12
  • Well, perhaps the tags 'история-языка' & 'slavic' should be removed then? Otherwise, why to have a tag which cannot be used at all? – Manjusri Feb 4 '13 at 10:14
  • @Manjusri Historical questions do not always mean Linguistics questions. This is an example of a question that uses the Slavic tag. By the way, I migrated your question. I'm sure you'll receive more appropriate answers there, but make sure to expand on your question to explain your reasoning. – Alenanno Feb 4 '13 at 10:16

SE sites have certain standards of quality and certain scope limitations. Check the FAQ, specifically sections about what can be asked, and what should be avoided. When the user makes cryptic and vague statements — they run the risk of being downvoted. When a user makes statements that are unsourced, or outright plagiarizes — they run the risk of being downvoted. When the user is following a mantra such as exampled in the quote below — they run the risk of being downvoted:

Точность формулировок, терминология, библиография и прочие мелочи = чужая мне печаль.

One does not have to be a guru in any particular area of knowledge, to make an informed and responsible decision about the quality of any given source. That is a fundamental research skill that is taught at any university, alongside of other fundamental skills, such as proper methods of gathering, evaluating, and analysing data in the laboratory. Given one particular user’s “shameless acknowledgement of ignorance” in these matters, they are in no position to complain.

I, for one, downvoted only single one (1) of said user’s myriad of questions and answers, ergo there are at least five people “who systematically downvotes” poor content. As the saying goes: if everyone around you is an expletive, maybe it is time to look in the mirror.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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