Was I treated fairly by this user and moderator?

Question

The OP:
Need help finding the right video production software
My original Post (without the mods changes):
https://video.stackexchange.com/posts/25644/revisions
The moved to discussion topic: https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/88486/discussion-on-answer-by-kite-need-help-finding-the-right-video-production-softwa
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Summary:
I posted an answer to the OP's question on Jan 8th. Yesterday I received a response and downvote from a user.

****Facts of the case:****
I chose to flag the response, I chose to debate with the user. When the mod reviewed they sided with the user, censored my posting, left the downvote, and the user then left a very long posting repeating the information previously debated.

****I wish to prove that:****
1. The actions of the mod require some correction
2. The actions of the user were wrong.

My posted answer:
The OP was asking for a video editor that does 3 things specifically. The top comments had recommended Davinci Resolve at the time but no definitive answer-posting was given on one of the points: the resolution they wanted being supported.

I knew blender vse was able to perform the 3 functions requested. So I wrote an answer outlining that it was an option. As a followup I thought I'd outline the shortcomings of the program as it functions differently than others. I thought to include this given the OP seemed to want to use the program for other things as well, plus in general no-one wants to learn a video editor just to use it for those 3 specific things.

I also had experience using DaVinci Resolve. Many things I expected to be included by default, like choosing any fps, we're not included in the software and I found such omissions and the ui's assembly line (go from 1 fullscreen tab to the next and don't look back) nature, compared to other editors to be limiting. (If you don't agree with that consider: correct me if I'm wrong but compared to a program like blender where it lets you write your own scripts and rewrite the entire program if you so choose...resolve can infact be described as limiting, no?) So I labelled it as limiting and decided to outline that they should confirm that it does infact support the needed resolution, incase some of the comments were assumptions that it did. (I think that's fair that people might assume any resolution would be supported by any well-used program especially. As well it was made as a comment and not an answer post, and comment posts in my experience are generally done with less precision than answer posts. And given my history with the program and how it makes you work within presets in certain regards, i thought it fair to raise a flag of caution...because preset resolutions is fairly common)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A few weeks after posting, I received a downvote and response from another user as outlined above. They labelled the information I gave on resolve as "flat wrong". They compared DaVinci Resolve to aftereffects as well. My understanding given the wordchoice and their postings above was that they use DaVinci Resolve and are responding out of software loyalty rather than logical discussion and debate. Nothing I stated to my knowledge was wrong in my answer, and they had not provided anything other than their own confirmation that the resolution issue was supported by resolve (I never stated it wasn't). Because of this I saw the downvote action as unjustified. Normally I would simply adjust my answer to include the definitive that Resolve does support the resolution (since they seem like a seasoned user), but given the information above, my experience with the program, the way they responded by comparing the program out of the blue to aftereffects, how they downvoted my comment when nothing was logically incorrect, and called it "flat" wrong (I don't think wrong needs an adjective)...I decided to flag the post for a moderator rather than take action.

Summary of my interpretation at the time:
1. I felt they had improperly downvoted my comment because I said negative things about the program he seems to use and advocate for on a regular basis (looking above). Their wordchoice (adding an adjective to the word wrong?). And bringing a completely different program into the discussion, aftereffects, made me feel there was bias.

2. Nothing I said was logically incorrect, yet he had labelled it all as logically incorrect. So I thought it easy to debate with him on those points. I also agree that I didn't cover the reasoning for the claims that it is limiting in enough detail (it was meant as an aside to the top comments and information to provide a word of caution). So I thought to bring that information to the table to cleanup the misunderstanding.

3. My posting wasn't absolute. I threw criticism at my recommendation, blender, to outline my experience with it and the limitations 'I believed' were worth noting should they use it for extended use. I felt it was appropriate to include the criticism though given the OP's wordchoice and request, being inpart one that requests a subjective opinion of what program to use. I put the information about DaVinci in less detail so I agree its fair to open it up for discussion in more detail as to the specific reasons. So it was appropriate to open any part of it up for discussion where I could provide further evidence to support the claims if needed. The posting about Davinci was meant as a caution to be considered with the information already posted about it to date in the thread. I had actually written the specifics, but realizing the length deleted them in the original answer posting.

Based on considering all this once more I thought it fair to respond to their claims, and try resolving this on my own. If I truly believed there was nothing logically wrong, then providing more information seemed like the better answer.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Debate:
So I debated with them. They then labelled my debate as a rant. They labelled my original answer as a rant. They misconstrued the OP's question. They continued to speak out about resolve as an "industry standard" and "fully functional". Yet looking above at their comments made on the OP they clearly labeled it as "almost fully functional" in the same thread (I see they went back and edited those old postings conveniently yesterday after we debated so they no longer contain that information...).

I was going to go through the points, but its best just to read it, as me stating the same thing over isn't going to change anything. Everytime I made a point they either dismissed it, ignored it, changed the conversation, or labelled the discussion as a rant. This happens 3 times as you can see.

After the third time: They came back. Moved the topic to chat, and made their comment as to why: "Resolve can handle custom resolution just fine. The rest of the issues have been moved to chat." This is fair, they have every right to do this. And this is conjecture on my behalf, but they came back after reading what I wrote...moved it...and then suddenly chose to not continue the conversation...? It was only many hours later that after the mod sides with them that they write a huge blurb repeating their stance without debating any of the 3 points I had proven to date. ????? Something is fishy here.

https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/88486/discussion-on-answer-by-kite-need-help-finding-the-right-video-production-softwa

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Closing Remarks:
To date I see no difference between the actions taken by the user and someone who is simply blindly supporting the program and censoring information and opinions that run contrary to their worldviews.

Perhaps that is harsh and conjecture, but consider the following:

What would you do if you were trying to censor information about you DaVinci resolve that painted it in a bad light? Wouldn't you agree that if that was their goal, then everything they did achieved that censorship perfectly in the end? If the user was altruistic in their intentions it makes very little sense for them to have acted in the manner they did.

I believe the mod, should at bare minimum remove the user's downvote. I would also request that I simply be allowed to restate/include my original statements with the extra information as to why. I realize these are infact included in the debate we had, whether the user recognizes it or not, but in the current state my points while still proven in the debate we had are effectively buried and censored.

I still don't see any justification for it to be downvoted to begin with, especially by the user who is debating me in the manner that he is. There is little chance they made the downvote for the proper reasons if there were any, given the way they have responded to date.

Atm the post is left in a state where blender vse is seen as a bad option for no reason. That makes no sense. In seeking to dispel bias against one program you bring it on another? That's unfair. That's wrong.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For posters:
If the user-base disagrees with me and feels this was appropriate for the mod and user. I would like to draw attention to the fact that this is technically an avenue for people to induce censorship and abuse their power to settle personal qualms. For example I see no difference between the actions taken by the user and mod, than if for example they were best friends trying to censor negative feedback and/or settle personal qualms in a biased manner (that was just one extreme theory to illustrate). I feel the timing and the covering of tracks and the editing is all to convenient to ignore. It seems a bit much to just label this all as conjecture.

I would also request advice on how I should have handled the situation differently to avoid this in the future. Given the nature of the OP some opinion is necessary to answer properly, and opinion is always open for debate. But there should be a way to debate without people downvoting and attacking my person, where for my part I can correct and improve my answers based on the information debated without ire.

Answer 1

I believe the situation was handled correctly by the moderator and the user who commented. The user who left the comment was indicating that the answer was not useful. There's no reason to flag constructive comments like this. As for the downvote, users are supposed to downvote answers that are not useful. The tooltip literally says:

This answer is not useful

so there was no problem with the user downvoting.

Answer 2

I think you have either misconstrued or misunderstood a number of things here, including the timeline.

@pizzastatic has already pointed out why user downvotes are not "wrong" - anyone can up or down vote as they like. It's a feature of Stack Exchange. We would not remove another user's vote!

So I'll focus on mod activity.

The original mod who had the discussion with you is a very experienced professional filmmaker. And as you have commented, he wanted to advise you on your absolute statement about resolve. There was a discussion that he then moved to chat and numerous times tried to help defuse your apparent annoyance, and gave a full explanation.

At this point, as we do to sanity check each others' activities, he asked me to read over the whole thing independently.

I agreed his commentary was appropriate, and the long discussion on chat made sense, and while the first half of your post seemed reasonable, the other part was just a bit of a rant against resolve, based on your experience, but written as if it was fact. When you read his commentary you can see that those "facts" are actually incorrect.

It would have been better to post your experience as as a comment on the existing resolve answer, but really not on your answer, so at this point as the discussion between you and the other mod had not led you to understand why it was inappropriate here I edited to remove it and commented.

Even if you wanted to say that you had troubles with resolve, I'd suggest that would be a comment on the other post. Answers really need to answer the post - not end up as discussion.

Answer 3

Please read my post in the chat if you haven't. A few of your claims here make me think you haven't read it or you read it with a strong assumption about my intent. I tried to address a lot of your concerns mentioned here in that and it seems like you haven't seen the response as you assert several things to me that I specifically addressed and actually agree with you on.

Let me start by pointing out what Rory did. I am also a moderator of Video Production. I refrained from taking moderator action (other than the comment move to chat) because I was involved in the interaction with you. I moved the comment thread to chat and only left the pure factual statement we agreed on since the rest of the discussion was about commentary rather than the answer itself. I did this because comments are not intended for extended discussion and I realized we weren't going to be able to resolve the discussion in comments. I hoped that removing many of my own objections would show my good intentions.

You mentioned something about removing negative comments on the post. Checking the current state, I don't see where you would think that happened. My negative posts were about the fact that Resolve 12 (the last version available on Windows 8) was not a great NLE option and the fact that Resolve does have a steep learning curve, but functions in the way that other professional NLEs behave. Both comments still exist as expansion and detraction on the Resolve answer. Unlike the impression you have gotten, I'm not a fanboy of Resolve. I do use it professionally and I think it's a great product, but it isn't the right answer for everyone and until recently it was much, much more limited.

As for timing of the chat response and the mod actions, in my last comment, I attempted to draw things to a conclusion and pointed out I needed to go to sleep. I saw your response to my comment and realized it was going to take more discussion, so I cleaned up the comment thread before going to sleep. I was on my phone at the time and didn't have time for a full fledged response to try to clear things up. When I got up in the morning, I wrote up the longer response in chat and posted it. I then requested a peer review from Rory to make sure I wasn't off base or acting inappropriately. I try very hard not to, but we're also human and can make mistakes, so review is important.

As far as editing your post to include a well explained version of your objection to Resolve, I know Rory was hesitant about it, but personally I believe that, so long as the answer stands on it's own as a real answer rather than just an objection, having content about why the answer is better than another answer is fair. Personally, I would be fully supportive of you editing your answer to include the level of detail you put in this post here. I don't think the level of detail in the comments was enough, but in your post here it is (giving concrete examples someone can respond to is important). My principle reason for a down vote was the lack of actionable support you provided for your claims. The portion I thought was a claim about resolution being limited by presets turned out to be a broader claim that was also unsupported with specifics (and misleading). For me, having an edit with more details about your objection would be the ideal outcome to the situation, especially if you can also include how Blender addresses those concerns.

As for the downvote sticking around. I'm sorry about that. I was waiting to see how the situation turned out and honestly didn't even think about changing it yet. There isn't a way for moderators to change votes of other users and the system doesn't reset votes on edits, so there was no way for Rory to change it. I've reverted the downvote for now since I completely agree it isn't relevant on the answer as it stands now. I'm actually tempted to upvote as the answer stands now, but I think it would more accurately reflect your view if you put a well explained comparison to resolve in and then I would disagree with your conclusion, so I'll hold off on upvoting for now.

I really do hope you can see that nobody is out to get you here. I think this is a big misunderstanding related to how Stack Exchange works (it's a bit different from forums and it's a common issue that newer users run in to sooner or later) and what intents were on both sides. I'm sorry that my initial communications came off poorly to you. They were based on a misunderstanding of your intent on my part. I have been trying to clarify that, but feel like you've gotten an impression of me from the initial confused interaction that's made that difficult for me to communicate. Please feel free to reach out to me more in the chat discussion if you have further concerns. I really do want to be able to resolve this situation to both of our satisfaction and put it behind us.

Answer 4

I have as suggest sat back and watched this thread for the past week to collect information about what is the correct way to interact on this exchange. This thread has proven to me that it is allowed in this stack exchange for people to flex their status and downvote with only subjective cause. And that it is appropriate for people to label each-other subjectively when it suits their needs regardless of circumstance.

I have judged this by all the since deleted comments, all the since deleted/fixed/modified down/upvotes, and the amount of subjectivity and inability to agree on proven-fact when offering opinions/fact/debate/conjecture.

This is useful information, I will use it as I move forward with future interactions on the video editing stack exchange. I do not agree or think it right, and I expect it creates much feelings of resentment among users and ultimately crumbles the integrity of the system in comparison to reddit, but that is besides the point. It allows myself and others in turn to function much more liberally in accordance with the degree of ruling outlined.