I see lots of active people complaining for unjustified and uncommented downvotes, questions that are easily closed, answers that are removed by mods (while the normal behaviour should be that users just downvote them, or even better, simply give better answers), lots of complains about negativity on health.SE and people that are literally running away from this site: in the first days there were a lot of questions and answers, now much less.
Do you feel something is going wrong on this website?
Can we change our mods here? "I'm one of the first users during private beta who was trying to help here by keeping the beta alive.. I've been banned for a week for unclear reasons.. my answers on which I've spent several hours got removed.. the site is badly managed and people are not encouraged enough.. If we won't change anything, this site would be dead very soon.." by kenorb
Does this site want to succeed? "In my experience here, there has been a lot of negativity; down votes, not happy about this or that. To me it feels like the community is trying to set such high standards and narrow scope that it is strangling it's self." by James Jenkins
Why did my comment get deleted? When the user Franck Dernoncourt put togheter the links of people complaining - just as I am doing now - his comment got deleted
Should my answers get removed, because of my personal style? kenorb complains about removal of his answer. I feel users' downvotes are designed to blame an answer, while mods shouldn't syndicate on the contents of answers. Use of mod powers to remove trolls' answers is correct, but stating what is "the truth" is abuse.
What is the current reason of answer removal: 'symptoms and how migraine is categorised'? Again: an answer being removed because only partially answered to the question. kenorb: "If people don't like my answer or characteristics, down-vote it or comment with suggestions, but not removing it"
Should mod remove answers which doesn't address all sub-questions? Again: the user thinks his answer is correct, or at least good enough to be kept alive; mods don't think so; mods remove the questions while the correct behaviour should have been to 1) comment encouraging to improve the answer, or in case of laziness 2) downvoting, but never deleting.
What's wrong with my answer to cold in summers with nose bleeding issues? Again: contents of the answer are syndicated and the answer is deleted, while it should be just downvoted or helped to be improved through comments.
What are the benefits of eating food - closed? Question closed for being "too broad" but apparently not broader than other questions that are happily alive on the website. Again: problems rise when users want to state "the truth" by downvoting and closing other users' questions, while positive behaviour should be "live and let live": if somebody asked that question it's because he thinks it's useful, please respect this.
Do we need to explain self-explanatory quotes? Again: abuse of deleting power. stackexchange is designed to rely on crowd's upvotes and downvotes, mods shouldn't judge too quickly what is "not perfect".
Question that should not be closed is being closed is an example of Should we try to reword "personalized" questions instead of closing? : "On a site like Health, there will often likely be a temptation to close questions as being too personal, and not answerable because the advice would be too specific to that one person. I think we should try to be as useful as possible, and wherever possible, edit the question to reword it so that it is generic enough to be answered on this site rather than just closed." by Jez
What to do when the close voters don't comment? Users voting to close, without commenting.
Should I delete my account as an Ayurvedic physician? Unconfortable feelings by ayurvedic physician: he complained that his answers get often downvoted for lacking reference.
https://health.meta.stackexchange.com/a/70/120 "the community seems very hostile and negative at the moment in my opinion.. the site tends to be more off putting them welcoming" by user139 who ran away from the site
What are the most likely essential amino acids to be deficient in a vegan diet? Apparently too specific for somebody who wants me to add questions (jiggunjer) that I'm not interested to ask; too broad for somebody else (JohnP). After some chatting it appeared that it just needed to be reworded. I got 4 downvotes before rewording from "which amino acids might be lacking in a vegan diet" to "what are the most likely essential amino acids to be deficient in a vegan diet".
Which waste residues accumulate into the liver? How to get rid of them? This is something it often happened to me: you can't just ask things you don't know on health.SE: you must provide reference in your question. you get downvotes and you make so much research that you finally end up answering your own question. I don't think this is the proper way it should work. I have te feeling you're only allowed to ask things you already know the answer, otherwise it will banned as "too broad".
The same here: Can food be addictive? I was not allowed to ask about "food addiction" ("too broad"), I could only choose between "sugar addiction" and "starch addiction", while most of research is not making such difference.
NOTE: I only searched on "meta". I'm sure that more examples can be found in health.SE