34

While I personally don't think that the answer is necessarily the best answer provided so far (I personally didn't vote on it and upvoted a different one), I don't agree that it does not answer the question. It starts with: A new*, deliberately pejorative, term to describe an old phenomenon, that of pressuring individuals or companies through the media when ...


24

Because sometimes people aren't rational. In fact, I'd argue that people are rarely rational, liberals and highly-educated people included. Most of our behavior is driven by factors other than pure, cold rationality – things like religion, tribalism, nationalism, patriotism, and the desire for the respect of our friends and neighbors, to name just a few. If ...


20

I want to spell out what the core of this dispute is, because I think that will help you guys as you try to establish policy about answers like mine. So... There is an essential confusion about what constitutes a 'discussable' group, not just here but generally. There are many groups that we are perfectly comfortable discussing politically: political parties;...


17

I think Brythan's (non-)answer put it best: Really though, if you want the answer to this, we're the wrong place to ask. The real problem is the question, which, by asking for the internal motivations of a broad group of people, almost guarantees that any answer will be uselessly incomplete and/or offensive to a broad group. It should be closed and ...


15

Update: just noting some developments... The disputed answer was deleted again roughly two weeks ago (beginning of March 2020); after gaining more experience on this site, I honestly don't think it's worth fighting over that quality of an answer, so I'm not voting to undelete again. Something that I had missed the first time around (well, because it ...


14

It's not a CoC violation. It's not smart by any stretch, but a CoC violation would have been a direct attack. Something along the lines of All [members of this political party] should die in a dumpster fire What Ted posted was more of a diatribe. It's not untrue, but he's juxtaposing his cariacatures of the Right so he has a straw-man to knock down in his ...


13

The user that posted the answer either deleted their account themselves, or had their account deleted or destroyed. When an account is deleted, all contributions with a negative score are also deleted (with some exceptions, see here). When an account is destroyed, all contributions are deleted regardless of score. This post had a score of -1, so was ...


12

The question was "Why did people still chant “Lock her up” at Trump rallies in 2019?", and he answer appears to make an honest attempt to answer that question. The answer does try to divine the motivations of others, but that's what this particular question is asking for. You can't really answer this question without guessing the motives of others. It ...


12

The only objective way to answer this question is to provide the intended meaning used by the majority of people who use that term. By all means: find the objective survey that establishes how the majority of people use the term. I couldn't. What's easy enough to find is expert opinion that backs up the answer you say is not objective: In that usage, "...


11

If I handled a deletion flag on that answer, I would probably decline the flag. In fact, there was a VLQ flag on that answer which got declined by a different moderator. That answer was deleted because members of the community voted to delete it. With that in mind, there are a couple of reasons I can think of why someone might want to delete that answer....


11

The answer was deleted by a mod. For his reasons I have to refer to his answer. As that answer is a bit terse and only mentions one knock-out reason, it may be beneficial to analyse other potential reasons and evident problems with the post under discussion. First of all, the answer is largely a private analysis, meaning without references for all the wide-...


10

I deleted the answer mostly for this paragraph: American Jews are statistically more successful even than US whites -> it does not prove any privilege at all. Any person who dares to look for any hidden explanation is a conspiracy theorist and has an evil hidden agenda. Making the claim that Jews have some special protection from criticism which ...


10

As long as it's an attempt to make an answer, the not an answer flag will usually be declined. This is the case even if the answerer misunderstood the question and posted an answer to a slightly different question. The reason for this, I think, it that interpreting the question, and making the answer in the form the OP needs, is a thing that people who are ...


10

I agree that it does not completely answer the question. I have left a comment explaining what information I felt the answer lacked. However, how well an answer is answered is a qualitative concern which is meant to be addressed through appropriate commentary suggesting how an answer might be improved and voting. Flags are really only supposed to be used in ...


10

Sometimes the approach taken towards improving something is important. Your comments would be more likely to have been received well if they looked like constructive criticism trying to improve an answer, rather than appearing to be an apologia for female genital mutilation. In addition, it's worth noting that the question is more like "Why has the US ...


9

I'm not a fan of trump by any stretch of the imagination, and haven't interacted with the answer in any way, but it feels like it'd be off topic or at least completly unsubstantiated in the way it's presented. People loved chanting "lock her up". Plausible, but purely opinion In some sense, that's why no effort has been made - actually locking up ...


8

The answer was removed by the community, three trusted users to be exact. From what I can see, the removal is under review and has gathered one pending undelete vote. Further reading: Why and how are some answers deleted?


8

Not rude or abusive per the CoC I just flagged an answer that literally just said pretty much "The reason for X is because Left is rational and right is irrational", using a lot of randomly picked statements (can't even call them facts, because they are just that guy's personal opinions on which of his preferred ideological positions are rational)....


7

The "rude or abusive" flag links to the Code of Conduct. Regarding this specific answer, this section is relevant: No bigotry. We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion — and those are just a few examples. When in doubt, just don’t. The answer in question alludes to the ...


7

That answer was flagged as rude/abusive by a user and I agreed, so I deleted it. I agreed that it was rude/abusive because it reads like a conspiratorial rant which paints a vaguely-defined group of people as some sort of cartoonish villainous force. That answer was flagged for undeletion twice, and 2 different moderators declined those flags. I do ...


7

Whoever deleted this answer did the right thing. It is an incoherent piece that primarily displays prejudice and racism. It does that through a short string of allusions rather than bringing forth anything that would resemble a stringent argument. Basically it says something like that: "dark people are dumb" and that "city dwellers are dangerous". For '...


7

As the author of the answer that Swedish Architect (hereafter SA) takes exception to, I suppose I should offer my perspective... First, let me point out that SA has had a certain amount of input on my answer. If you look at the timeline of the answer, you'll see that SA offered an extensive edit on April 8, which I subsequently re-edited for balance, but ...


6

Many people are used to eat beef How do you use people to eat beef? You may think that this isn't total gibberish, but some of us disagree with you. In general when I see nonsense answers reject grammar correction edits that aren't marginal, I vote to delete. There is also the reason why this answer was accepted. It was accepted because the ...


5

This appears to be the suggested edit in question. I wasn't one of the two users who decided to reject this edit. So I can only speculate what their motives were. But what I would find questionable about this edit is that it does more than just adding references. It changes the tone of the answer by putting words into the author's mouth which might not have ...


5

We have to treat it exactly the same way as we treat other unsourced answers. Should we have a "back it up" rule for answers? Standards of Evidence? Up until now, the response users are supposed to take is downvote if they feel it's not useful, but don't delete it for lack of sources (and attempts to abuse a flag to delete it should be declined). ...


5

My objection: you rather gratuitously dropped "Kung FLu" in there, something that even Trump was skittish to endorse. Yes, you did that under the pretext of showing us the horrible "media bias". O RLY? As @tim reminded me, the post also contained the questionable phrase "Hollywood elite cabal — which includes many members of the media". Yes there was ...


4

There is essentially only 2 ways to interpret the gist of the question itself. Either it is a rant (which would make it off topic), or it is an inquiry made in earnest. The author of the question plead ignorance of the topic. So from that perspective, the facts outlined in the answer help to illuminate the topic. However, the question's author didn't ...


4

Here's what I consider to be the most-important part of the question: If Republicans had a majority in the House and the Senate at the start of the shutdown, and also have control over the executive branch, what actions by the Democrats could give the Republicans a logical reason to place blame on them? (Granted the question has been edited to be more ...


4

I voted to delete this answer as in my opinion it does not answer the question in the post title; "Why is Trump dubbing COVID-19 as the “Chinese virus” considered offensive, while many past epidemics have had similar naming schemes?". Instead it comes across to me as a rant which, although it provides an explanation as to why Trump uses this term, it does ...


3

I came across it in the low-quality queue. I voted to delete it because it adds no supporting evidence to show why it shapes Democrats' views (which is the subject of the question). I don't think this would have been a good comment either. The reason for that is that it lacks any evidence or reasoning why this is relevant to the question. If this had been a ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible