It was a deep sorrow to see someone again not telling the truth. Being a very new account, about 2-3 months “old”, is not an excuse. Let us see what exactly happened:
Alright, this may sound the good and useful track at first, because it is some feedback, but the OP rightfully asked for justification as follows:
I am very happy to see that the OP asked this since what “AlexK” wrote is quite unfair without justification as those are heavy words on the situation. Let us see what this guy replied:
As you can see, this what he claimed:
Why not, dear AlexK? Why is it better to summaize it in _your_ words rather giving the readers an unbiased link? It seems that people have disagreed with you based on the comment upvotes. Hopefully, this is not the reason… I will amend that with a screenshot here:
Dear AlexK, it is not fair not telling the truth again.
First of all, you cannot know who downvotes your posts as downvotes are intentionally anonymous on Stack Overflow. It is in the core foundation of the site as far as I can tell. You have been around for a while. I thought you ought to know this. Therefore, accusing others with downvotes without knowing is unfair.
Secondly, as the date shows the conversation happened on Christmas day. You got your last downvote on the 23rd of December, so no one had ever downvoted you ever since until your comment.
Thirdly, lpapp could provide screenshots for you to prove that the claim is incorrent; he is probably the most authoratitive person in this case to point this out, even though I do not think he needs to defend himself as you have got no downvotes. I think it is better to be careful before making those assumptions.
Dear AlexK, this is a problem with your participation with due respect.
Firstly, you asked a question about a declined flag where you were wrong based on the moderator’s reaction. This was confirmed by community votes as well as the replying moderator.
Secondly, lpapp gave you another example where you may have done nothing to improve an existing post coming from the upstream contributor of the library. You voted to delete without improving, copy/pasting into a comment or leaving a reply what exactly is missing. He warned you to please be careful. You are recommending post deletion too much in his opinion and that is what he wrote. It is not abusive; it is lpapp’s personal opinion.
Thirdly, such a discussion is not a war and you really should not treat discussions like that. If you do, it is not going to be fruitful or just respectful disagreement. I would call this facing two viewpoints which may respectfully diverge in the end.
Firstly, you always wrote something targetting him. It is unfair to expect him not to reply in such cases. It would be the same the other way around, too.
Secondly, if a discussion is complex, then it is a complex and it ends when the two parties see where they agree or disagree. If that takes 5-6 comments, then it takes. It does not come to a conclusion when you think you are done.
Thirdly, it is not unusual on Meta Stack Overflow to have 5-6 comments anyway. Please do not approach discussions like that negatively.
Dear AlexK, that is your decision. Although, sometimes it is rude to write something without following up, but it is fine if you stop it. You are not obliged to continue afterwards. lpapp did not complain about this either, so I assume he was OK with that.
Firstly, what is strange about giving feedback under the relevant question?
Secondly, he did not beg for your upvote, etc. He humbly requested you to be more careful with recommending such deletions like the offending review you asked about or the one lpapp showed. Isn’t feedback the point of meta questions?
Thirdly, if you think the upvotes are unjustified on the comments because the posts are offensive or say, abusive, please do flag them for moderator attention so that moderators can deal with them
So, let us get back to dear AlexK’s sentence:
Many hold the opinion that justifying a one-year-lasting ban because of a disagreement with lpapp is getting far out of your way to put revenge on him due to this disagreement. It seems you took his feedback personally. That is not a wise thing to do. He was objective. Disagreements happen on a daily basis, especially on such a well-visited site as Stack Overflow.
I mean, no disagreement like this deserves ban, not even an hour, let alone one year. Moreover, whom exactly to ban in disagreements? Why to ban anyway? This was not offensive, let alone abusive, and actually the community seems to have agreed with lpapp anyhow.
So, my humble and probably rhetorical question goes here, especially for accounts 2-3 months “old” like in this case.
Why does Meta Stack Overflow tolerate people not telling the truth?