As I commented on the question: I think that ridiculing politicians, their views and/or their actions is detrimental to this site because it breeds hostile sentiments between people with different opinions. So we should not do that.
It is also detrimental to an objective discourse about politics in general.
Whether or not Theresa May is an "international ...
We should not engage in ridicule.
This is a question and answer site. Not a site based on ridicule. It is my opinion that May has been a National Joke for a long time. But good questions and answers are based on a reasonably objective baseline.
Ask and answer in a neutral way or get edited or deleted.
The user and all their content were deleted because after the user posted this question they went on a trolling spree and posted a series of extremely offensive one-liner questions.
However, this one question has value. I undeleted it.
A desire for revenge is not tolerated on this site, @guest271314. Instead of focusing oneself on hurting other users who voted to close posts, one should see if these posts can be improved.
Other than this, Use the Force, Luke:
A simple Stack Exchange API query returns a list of Closed Questions originated by a certain User. Further playing with the ...
As the moderator who deleted the question, I want to let you in on my reasoning.
The point of the question was really to ask about guns.
I have no problem with essentially asking, "Do guns keep people safe?" ... although, such a question, because of the heat it generates, should be extremely academic in how it is asked. When I imagine a good answer, I ...
I think avoiding gratuitous ridicule should be the default. If you can phrase your question or answer while avoiding that, do so.
It gets much more hairy when the ricule is itself the topic of the question. Some of the users here unfortunately ask with some regularity questions structured like:
here's a meme/label/story ridiculing X
what is the origin of ...
A moderator came and first of all deleted the phrase "the Jews" in the text without replacing it with any other phrase! (He/She accused me of "spread[ing] antisemitism", which is meaningless and simply subjective.
Let me explain why this was antisemitic.
You were criticizing actions of the government of Israel. There is nothing offensive about that per se ...
It's Too Broad
I agree that as it currently stands, it's not a great question. Questions like this are typically closed because they sound like a solicitation for users' opinions, rather than something that can be answered definitely.
I Edited It
However, I think the question can be made answerable by restricting its domain to some specific notion of "...
I characterized Theresa May's deal as undead
This doesn't seem that offensive to me, but it's unnecessary. Saying the deal is dead would be a fine characterisation of the deal, I think (and as does the FT). Dead being to opposite of alive, a deal being alive if the parties that are party to it still support it.
and May herself as a necromancer.
It wasn't deleted by a mod, it says it was deleted by the "Community" user.
That usually means that some automated process did it. At a quick glance, the question doesn't seem to have a lot of flags or downvotes, so I'm not sure what triggered that automatic process.
Another thing I noticed is that the User's name is greyed out, which means that he ...
This is actually a reasonable question. It isn't high quality as worded, but with some clarification it has a core of a good question. Fully fits "good subjective" SE criteria, fully ontopic, can produce good answers.
Additionally, there are purely political benefits that would produce good answers - for example, a very good concise answer would cover the ...
I deleted it because it was going to turn into a discussion, not a question.
I've had very good questions downvited, closed and deleted myself:
https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/1310/what-percentage-of-american-terrorism-is-domestic-vs-muslim (What percentage of American terrorism is "domestic" vs. Muslim?) See this meta: What is not ...
You can find all your closed questions here. Alternatively, you can search on the main site for closed:yes
Deleted posts (10K+ users only)
You can find all your deleted posts here. Alternatively, you can search on the main site for deleted:yes.
only content you own is returned when searching for deleted content
This question isn't of much quality. Your (accepted) answer to it was basically "we can only speculate". Frankly leaving it deleted would have been not much worse than what we have now; where we have a closed question with the answer "we can only speculate"...
On Politics.SE, direct ridicule is unacceptable because it's rude and condescending.
On the other hand, often an accurately succinct summary is so self-evidently incongruous that it incidentally performs some of the same functions as ridicule. So if we observe that Pol X slipped on a banana peel, (assuming, of course, that the fact remains politically ...
Your question has multiple problems.
Unnecessary and unrelated details: Why do we need to know about other scandals to answer this question? For example, "President Clinton, under increased scrutiny of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, offered $20 billion in loans to Mexico to stabilize the peso. Can the President loan money to a foreign country without Congress'...
Politics Stack Exchange is not a link sharing site.
The news story may be tangentially related to your question, but the fact that you made a point of linking to it thrice (in the same question) and your past behaviour on the site made it more than obvious that you were not asking the question in good faith. I've closed and deleted your question, because ...