Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • 10
    I'm very curious about your opening words: Based on how SE has responded to this situation... Have we really received an SE response? Maybe all we have thus far is a Sara Chipps response. I know that Sara has been couching her language as though she is speaking for the company, and perhaps she is. But the rest of SE leadership has been conspicuously silent as all this drama has unfolded, so I still can't tell if Sara is really speaking on behalf of the company, or just using her official position to make it seem that way. Either way, though, this has all been bungled in a colossal fashion. Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 10:11
  • 3
    @J.R. this was posted after a week and it has "we" everywhere. They wouldn't be posting this without consensus. Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 10:19
  • 4
    Upvoted because – disappointingly – this shows the actual stance of the company and it’s highly unlikely they’ll change at this stage. Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 10:47
  • 4
    @adiga - Yeah, your post already links to that, and I've already read it several times. Still, I haven't seen any strong indicators that other established higher-ups strongly concur, heartily endorse, staunchly agree with, or helped draft that so-called update. Moreover, before it was posted, I was kind of expecting someone else might chime in, to show some solidarity behind Sara. Instead, it was just more of the same stubbornness. Oh, and as for it having "we" everywhere, that means nothing to me. This whole thing was started because of a spat over plural pronouns. Which "they" do you mean? Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 14:01
  • 76
    Sara's use of "re-litigate" implies that she thinks (or her handlers think) it was ever litigated in the first place. If so, it was a hearing to which I was not invited. If they want to repair this I think starting by actually talking with me would be a great idea. Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 14:22
  • 1
    Second comment under that talks about appeal process. I agree not possible and am moving towards just not using SE anymore right now but might be worth preserving in an answer (in case comment deleted) Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 16:38
  • 1
    @MonicaCellio, it seems clear that SE won't "re-litigate" the issue and won't discuss their actions, even with you. If I were in your shoes, the last place I would want to be is back as a moderator, having to deal with SE. The unfortunate fact is that they own the sites and can do whatever they want, including firing staff or volunteers at will. There's little you can do to get reconsideration or even a response. They may even be refusing to discuss the matter in anticipation of potential legal action. (cont'd) Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 0:46
  • 14
    However, SE has made public claims about you that could be considered libel and could affect your future opportunities. It might be worth talking to a lawyer about getting SE to at least clear your name. Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 0:46
  • 11
    @fixer1234 the statements are very clearly defamation and quite likely libel. Commented Oct 6, 2019 at 1:20