Is Stack Exchange Inc still interested in cooperating with the community?

It seems that they lost any interest long ago. They are following a pattern.

1. October 2018: Twitter Driven Development Part 1

Someone complained on Twitter about titles of HNQs, esepcially questions on IPS. The issues with HNQ had been discussed on that site's meta before, but no one cared. However, after the Tweet it took no longer than 40 min to ban IPS from HNQ for several months. Not only that, even back then they threw moderators under the bus.

Links:

• Magisch's answer
• Marie-Lou's answer
• Remants of the Twitter thread
• Monica Cellio's post on medium

2. July 2019, Twitter Driven Development Part 2

Someone suggested an edit to an old answer, solely changing gender pronouns and "guy* to "person". They even edited code. The edit was rejected. So they took it to Meta Twitter and a Community Manager approved the edit.

Links:

• Mari-Lou's answer
• Suggested edit
• Twitter thread
• Old, relevant comment by animuson

3. September 2019: Firing a moderator

I'm still in shock over what happened. I could never have imagined Monica Cellio getting fired. A lot has been written here, so I will just quote two posts in full, because I consider them that important.

The first one is Stack Overflow moderator Bhargav Rao's comment summarizing what happened:

The reason why Monica was fired has been out and clear. She had a different view point from what the director of Q&A had, and was therefore thrown out like street garbage. The director has repeatedly demonstrated that they don't care about the community's feelings. There used to be a time when users were free to oppose whatever the company had done, and were able to remain on the site. But in the past few days, the Stack Exchange staff have tried to take down posts on MSE and Stack Moderators teams which were focused on the resignations, and suspended a user for posting that.

Furthermore, Director of Public Q&A at Stack Overflow Sarah Chipps' reply to Monica's Mi Yodea post (emphasis mine):

We understand there are some folks upset about this decision. We aren’t going to share specifics out of respect for all individuals involved but this is a site reaching millions of people and we have to do what we believe fosters a spirit of inclusion and respect. When a moderator violates that, we will always do our best to resolve it with them privately. When we can’t we must take action. This is always done based on what we believe is best for all SE users.

I emphasized what strikes me as a bit of a contradiction. The part about "all individuals involved" looks somewhat misplaced, considering what comes later. Doesn't look to me like the moderator they fired is included in "all individuals involved".

Certainly, 2) is rather a minor issue, but it's needed to show the new pattern. Whenever Stack Exchange staff had the choice, they acted with total disregard to the wishes of the community. SE is not run by the community, but Authoritarian.

These minor issues (some possibly questionable titles, a rejected, superficial edit, some questions asked about a change to the CoC and a "possible CoC violation in the future") lead to drastic consequences, totally out of proportion. It would have been understandable had this been real, grave issues. But they weren't. And you know why? Because the community works that well.

And it shows what SE truly thinks of its moderators. People, volunteering to make SE what it is (still) known for.