In this answer which was deleted I made the argument that Trump often lies and promotes conspiracy theories, which is why people who stay with him don't value veracity and science and therefore are prone to believing in conspiracy theories in general (the question asked why conspiracy theorists are more likely conservative):
The two premises about Trump are backed up in the answer with corresponding Wikipedia articles, and I suppose they are not really contentious.
Unsurprisingly, I find this argument valuable.
The first version of this answer was inflammatory (Trump supporters "are decoupled from reality to a degree that borders on the delusional"), flagged as such and deleted. I edited it to meet community guidelines (Trump supporters now "do not find fault with his general lenient approach to science and truth and believe many of his specific lies, often against all evidence") and apologized to the mods because I understand the need to keep a civil tone here, without which discussions would get out of hand quickly. A mod then undeleted the answer upon my request.
But after a day or so this second version was deleted as well (by a different mod), this time with the argument that it didn't answer the question and that it is (only) a personal opinion about Trump.
In my opinion both allegations are plain wrong: The post clearly answers (or attempts to answer) the question — which specifically mentions QAnon which had a special relation with Trump —, and the statements about Trump are clearly not personal opinions. There is a host of lists of Trump's lies out there; but most of them are from "liberal" media that would be dismissed by Trump supporters. I consciously chose the community based Wikipedia articles because wrong contents there typically does not survive long, especially when contentious subjects are concerned. I can certainly provide more references, but in this special case Wikipedia seems to be the most reliable one, due to its cooperative authorship.
So, in conclusion, I'm piqued by what I perceive as heavy-handed, unjust moderation. (At the same time I'd like to use the opportunity to express my respect for the mods, including @Phillipp, whose job here is probably harder than, say, over in electrical engineering). Is it just my hurt pride? If not, obviously I'd be happy if the argument were put back into the discussion.