I know it always feels like the mods must be against you when you get a moderation reply, but I'm moderately sure we're not doing that. There is probably some unconscious bias but given how much practice we have at staying neutral—e.g. making a point of moderating bad comments even if we agree with them—such bias is probably relatively subtle. We also have a lot of practice at reviewing our own decisions, since users aren't shy about pointing out what they feel was biased. In those cases the moderation calls are usually defensible. Also, if we were grossly biased, we'd get major pushback from the community, which is always on the lookout for moderator overreach. That doesn't happen very often.
The thing is, even if someone else was being unkind, you still have to follow the site guidelines in how you respond.
What you reas as a snark was just a point. He called the library obscure. Don’t believe many others would use that description. I quoted it to make a point not to take a stab at him.
Same goes to this conversation. While you attack me personally I just address your points.
We have different style of communication. You are obviously more sensitive to the style of writing than I’m. You are correct I could have style my answer differently.
I was trying to address the two points he made for other candidates. He used strong language and I just addressed his exact words.
As you said, in your earlier comment, we would not work well together.
