> Let me speak for myself.

This may be incredibly obvious but no one speaks for anyone here but themselves, even if they use the word "we" in their posts.

> I tread on a few toes...I have tried to be helpful and polite

I've seen the latter, I believe. You should stick with that one instead of the former. There seems to be a general community spirit of helpfulness here, and when someone acts contrary to that spirit, I've noticed that many individuals speak up in defense of the Monastery and its unwritten guidelines of behavior. (clarification: good, civil, community-oriented behavior)

> Many (most?) people here have welcomed me.

There are thousands of users. That's quite a welcome. I don't mean to be sarcastic, but you seem to use a lot of hyperbole in your post.

> But I have also watched in disbelief as I answer several questions to the best of my ability and they get downgraded one after the other.

I haven't read enough of your posts to know whether "to the best of my ability" is synonymous with "correct" and "the needed information". I don't know the tone of your posts either. So I'm not sure I could say that the reaction to your posts is unfair.

> Which is why today no post of mine appears in the list of best posts of the day...

Is that your goal?

> Please do not react to that by modding me up across the board either.

Okay. I haven't voted on this node because while I believe it is well-written, I also believe that it casts a lot of shadowy accusations. I don't like that as a precedent. Plus, even if I had real evidence that you'd been wronged, I still think that sympathy votes are just uncool.

> Besides which, as long as whoever it is doing that keeps on doing that, they cannot use their votes against someone who actually would be bothered. :-)

Some posts deserve a --. I haven't read yours, but it's possible that some of yours deserved to be downgraded. I've gotten -- votes before, sometimes for no reason, more often because there was something not right with my post. It would be more appropriate for the person who votes you down to tell you why, but they are free NOT to do so if they wish. You have the right to vote the way you want to. I doubt that there is one person that is out to use all his/her votes on you, anyway.

>The only reason that I am bringing this up is that I have been told by several that I am far from the first person that this has happened to.

Does "this" refer to receiving -- votes? Or receiving a whole horde of -- votes? If it's the latter, I'm curious as to why. You made some mention of being voluble in the chatterbox. Do you think that may be affecting your standing in the community?

> /tell me in person what specifically you object to. If you think it warrants public discussion, then post your opinion as an anonymous monk. A very good place to do that is in response to this post.

Sure. I think that you are not the center of anything here, though you have made an extraordinary number of posts in the very short time since you joined the community. I think you should cite facts instead of making ambiguous accusations about an organization of conspirators (q{But a small clique should not decide for everyone who they do and do not want to be around, then organize an effort to drive the unwanted people away.})

This is the first post of yours I have read. I replied instead of voting on it. I would be interested to hear your further impressions of the community, but with more specifics.

Thanks.

e-mail neshura