Related: https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/issues/2418

Anyway, why can't we see the profile page of a user that mutes/blocks us? Seems a bit too much safe space for such users, pitty.

A narcissist cannot be reasoned with. Next time we should just ignore such users.

I know he's not going to see this but just for the record, having a neurodevelopmental disorder is not derogatory. That was a sincere attempt to help.

Hi again,
I notice you've mentioned several times that you've solved 1900 katas. I believe the Codewars community would extend the same respect to new users who seek help. Conversely, the community could challenge top users if they're found cheating. You can't doubt their integrity, dedication, and hard work. However, they might get frustrated if someone repeatedly argues with them over unfounded accusations.

But for now, let's put all of this aside. Remember, on this platform, we're all essentially strangers. We go by usernames, not real names. Imagine that no one has said anything to you.

Take a moment to cheer up and step outside for a breath of fresh air.

This may be of interest to you.

Just admit you dropped the ball and move on

This comment is very problematic:

If you do not delete all of the conversation trails that have been initiated by myself then in my considered personal opinion:

(a) You are implicity saying that the above two examples are acceptable conduct both on CodeWars and in society in general

(b) ... 

because:

• (a) You demand censorship of a conversation, just so YOU can feel better, regardless of the impact on others and the community in general
• (b) You are projecting how you would assess a situation ("You are implicity saying that ..."), in name of another person. Don't do that. You can only speak for yourself.
• (c) You are framing 2 examples of responses you didn't like (perhaps understandably), in order to get ALL of the conversation trails deleted.

I think you have a major issue communicating with other people.

You're like a dog with a bone, seriously. Absolutely incorrigible. Let me try one final time to illucidate you as to what exactly everyone but yourself is talking about:

1. You noticed weird behaviour in your code.
2. You did some preliminary check.
3. You concluded the tests were buggy.
4. You raised this in the discourse

• So far, so good.

5. Someone looked over the example you gave and concluded that the tests is correct.
6. You re-raise the same issue anyway.
7. A second user inspects your issue and concludes the test is correct, and demonstrates where your error was.
8. You triple down on your claim, despite being rebuked again.
9. You continue spouting about how reasonable you're behaving over and over, contrary to what pretty much everyone else is saying to and about you.

TL;DR: Your first comment was reasonable, albeit erroneous. Every further comment you made after your error was pointed out to you was unreasonable. Every further comment you wrote in this discourse proves that further.

We've tried with facts, we've tried with sarcasm, we've tried with snarkiness, we've tried with exaggerated politeness. None of this has been able to pierce the veil of your obstinacy. Please, just stop.

Hi CAdams747,

Codewars is full of amazing people. You can make them your friends with your amazing coding skills. Learn from them, even if it's the hard way, but always remember to accept your mistakes.

@CAdams747

I still do believe that the author of this challenge should give all of the programmed tests a 'once over' to ensure that all of the programmed tests do contain the correct results - but I obviously cannot compel the author of this challenge to do that

That's ME. I wrote this Kata. I wrote that example.

Actually, I already saw you original question yesterday, and I already I saw that EPiph correctly responded to it, so I upvoted the reply.

In my experience, before making raising an issue it is best to STOP and then check how many times a Kata has been solved. Given this is a 7 yr-old Kata example with 982 previous solutions the odds were literally almost 1000:1 that your "issue" would be self-inflicted, even if you couldn't see the reason.

Anyway, I felt compelled to give that example the once over, so I did, and it LGTM.

I actually wasn't notified about these messages... so only seeing them now...

Sorry if I closed your issue without too much of an explanation yesterday, I thought what I said would be enough to point the right direction. I only recently got the privilege to close issues.

Hi CAdams747

Yes, writing a solution which passes sample tests only to fail the full tests is actually quite a regular occurance on Codewars. This is because the full tests contain a full set of randomised tests and often many more fixed tests to ensure the validity of a solution.

Due to this, it is actually very common for solvers to become convinced that there is a problem in the tests, instead of in their code. This is why you will often see many comments in the discourse about this, but in my experience, 99% of the time it is just a problem with the solvers solution in a way they hadn't realised.

However it is of course possible for a kata to have errors, and we want to take this seriously, but if authors were required to "do a once over" anytime a solver felt like their solution was correct, there would be an unendless amount of work to do, because as I mentioned, this happens very often. This is why longtime users on this site tend to only take issues seriously which directly show a problem. Usually this means showing an input which was tested, and showing that the result that the tests expect is actually wrong.

Without this direct proof, requesting that a kata tests be checked over is a bit unreasonable. Keep in mind that all kata are checked carefully (or, should be) before being approved, and most real issues are found within the first few solves (while this kata already has hundreds of successful solves). Now, the issue you raised did try to show a direct proof, which is good, the only problem was that the proof had a flaw. I believe this is why the other users were giving you a hard time, because rather than simply acknowleging the mistake (which we all make) you kept insisting that your solution was correct.

So, with that all being said, I encourage you to continue trying to solve the kata, and keep track of the inputs being tested with. If you do run into an input where you are sure that the expected solution is wrong, then please raise an issue with the details, and either the kata author or someone else will look into it and fix it.

As for deleting the conversation, this would involve deleting other users posts too which is also not a reasonable request, unless they violate terms of service or similar (and from what I see, nothing of that kind has happened here). Posts on Codewars are fairly permanent, which hopefully has the positive effect of people thinking through their messages more carefully :)

@CAdams747, excuse me for the intrusion. I'm picking up clear signs of a neurodevelopmental disorder from the prosody and information packaging in your writing; for your privacy I won't say which one and I suggest you don't either. I understand this conversation is upsetting for you. I strongly suggest that none of the following are going to help:

1. Requesting that these conversations be deleted, or being upset when they are not
2. Continuing to communicate your belief that the author should check the tests for accuracy, or being upset when that action is not taken
3. Participating further in this particular discourse in any way, or being upset when others continue to do so

The best you can do is to set this issue down in your mind. You are not going to convince other users here of your viewpoint because they have their own good reasons for believing what they do, and if you are not likely to change your own mind then it's best you just leave this one as it stands.

Codewars is not in the business of censoring conversations. This is not a monologue, others are involved in this conversation too. I don't think you have the right, nor should you have the audacity to make such a request.