I see some contro:

  • it limits the freedom of expression
  • it limits the possibility of changing policies
  • if you have ideas that differ from others you immediately get silenced

I would increase the number votes needed to close a question on meta, the time before closing.

What do you think about?

  • possible duplicate of Why was this question not clear?
    – juergen d
    Feb 14 '14 at 10:25
  • 7
    Sam, I implore you to put more consideration into your posts on meta - you are responsible for 10 out of 50 questions on the first page of questions on meta and all 10 questions seem to state pretty much the same thing. There is no need to raise this volume of questions about the same thing. Please read what is meta and how does it work? as your understanding of what meta is about is different from what meta actually is and write one single well worded question that covers all of your issues so far so that the community can respond.
    – Flyk
    Feb 14 '14 at 10:32
  • @Flyk: Ok. Let's do an exchange. Try to help me to make other guys understand the issue that I'm pointing out. it shouldn't be a fight. People should be very civil here. Help me to ask people to put a bit some rules into discussion. Do it for the love for this community. Please. I implore you.
    – Revious
    Feb 14 '14 at 11:29
  • It will be hard for me to get while you're essentially spamming the site with the same question over and over again. As I said, if you read through how you're supposed to use meta, re-evaluate your existing posts (and probably remove some of them since you've asked about the same question multiple times) and then write one well worded, clear and concise post without trying to psychoanalyse the situation I will provide my support to try and help people understand what your issues are.
    – Flyk
    Feb 14 '14 at 11:32
  • 4
    You need to understand that you're essentially coming here questioning why Stack Exchange works the way it does, stating that it's all wrong, quoting random articles on Wikipedia and other places about psychology, without considering that we have these rules in place because of many years of experience with the Stack Exchange way of doing things. Every time you have a question about why we do something, it would be well worth checking out meta.stackoverflow.com to see if it has already been discussed in the past - you will find LOTS of posts on there that cover the questions that you have.
    – Flyk
    Feb 14 '14 at 11:34
  • 3
    Rather than asking more questions on meta, I would suggest that you come to the Software Recommendations chat room so that we can discuss this a bit more in depth, without comment length restrictions and without you asking more meta questions, which will inevitably get downvoted due to the number of questions you've asked about the same topic recently. I think this would be the best way for everybody to understand each other.
    – Flyk
    Feb 14 '14 at 11:36

None of your “contros” are valid, because we do not close questions for these reasons. Closing questions doesn't limit freedom of expression in any way (not that Stack Exchange is about freedom of expressions: it's a collaborative platform, not your blog). It doesn't limit changing policies: feature requests and discussions related to possible changes are on-topic and will not be closed. You are not silenced when you express differing opinions; however others may object with their own differing opinions.

You've made a lot of posts on this meta site lately, but you never seem to get to the point. A bit of personal advice: try to look at the situtation from outside eyes. When I look at your contributions here (which is all I know about you), I see someone with an axe to grind — you're clearly unhappy about something — and when people have replied to your concerns, you come back to the charge. You don't seem to take well to differing opinions, and fall back to accusing anyone who has differing opinions of ignoring you. We (meaning I and, I surmise, several other contributors here, but I can't presume to speak for them) are not ignoring you, but that doesn't mean we have to agree with you. If you keep this up, then like the boy who cried wolf, we might start ignoring you.

  • We includes me here! Thanks for phrasing it this way!
    – Bernhard
    Feb 14 '14 at 20:00

You must log in to answer this question.

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