On the Question: "What happens to the electricity after it is used in a CPU cycle?" a rather lively exchange occurred, in comments, between Olin Lathrop and I, where Lathrop couldn't technically support the validity of his stance.

The comment string was up for a short time but has now largely vanished, Lathrop's last comment surviving with the appearance of being unquestioned.

I've seen this sort of thing happen before, with the result being that users with high rep survive "comment wars" largely unscathed via selective snippage destroying history.

  • \$\begingroup\$ It's pretty arrogant to say that I couldn't validate my stance when we were having a disagreement. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Dec 29, 2014 at 15:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Olin: On the contrary, it's pretty arrogant to believe that a stance, once made, doesn't have to be defended. \$\endgroup\$
    – EM Fields
    Commented Jan 1, 2015 at 15:07

1 Answer 1


I deleted all of y'alls comments on each answer. There is none of this

"Lathrop's last comment surviving"

that you're talking about. I left his answer (and yours too) because there were no personal attacks involved. As far as I can tell, this is a fair resolution.

While I find it mildly humorous to see two knowledgeable people arguing about the definition of "electricity", I draw the line when it gets "lively". Deleting the comments is reasonable to me as it's not really a punishment, nor does it allow the bad will to stay up in public. If a neutral statement preceded an argument that contributes to any discussion, it may remain.

Keep it civil, and don't make it personal.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ 1. I commented on Lathrop's answer: "This question can not be answered because "electricity" is not a physical quantity. There is no such thing as a pulse of electricity. What units would you propose to measure this "electricity" in? This is like asking how much weather it takes to make a foot of snow. The whole question simply makes no sense." in order to disagree with his premise, and I provided the reasoning and the units of measure to substantiate my position. Your obliterating all comments puts his answer in a position of being uncontested, which it isn't. \$\endgroup\$
    – EM Fields
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 0:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ 2. How then to proceed? If I go back and comment on his answer, again, will that be allowed or will pointing out his errors be considered politically incorrect and result in even more censorship? I ask this without rancor, although as you may be able to sense, I am annoyed. \$\endgroup\$
    – EM Fields
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 0:06
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @EMFields I left Olin's answer, but then I also left yours... so I'm not exactly sure what you expect me to do without taking sides. Furthermore, you're missing the point if you're talking about "contesting" answers - this isn't a debate hall, it's a Q&A site. Ultimately, if you disagree with an answer, you can post your own answer, or downvote the one you disagree with. Past that, it's up to votes cast by the community to decide. \$\endgroup\$
    – W5VO
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 3:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ In this case, I'd say to drop it as it's already a closed question (diminishing returns). If I were to strategize on how to handle the situation in the future, I might try either editing the question to use proper terminology, or acknowledge the terminology in an answer and go on to address what the OP intended to ask. \$\endgroup\$
    – W5VO
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 4:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ OK, got it. Thanks. \$\endgroup\$
    – EM Fields
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 4:12

You must log in to answer this question.

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