-5

I propose making the following synonyms of (note, this tag does not yet exist):

  • 1
    Keep them separate, or modify the tags so they become anabaptist-amish and anabaptist-mennonite. – Double U Jun 22 '14 at 19:45
  • I don't really know enough about these groups, but I've only ever heard the term 'anabaptist' used for the historical groups, not the present day groups. My understanding it was a term for a particularly noteworthy movement within protestantism then, but now they're simple protestant denominations. – curiousdannii Jun 24 '14 at 1:58
-1

the historical differentiation between Anabaptist vs. Mennonite or Amish (or Hutterite, they're also Anabaptist), is sorta similar to Calvinist vs. Reformed or Presbyterian.

they're denominations that have roots in older Reformation movements.

  • 1
    This is true enough but it is not a useful response to this question because it does not propose a way to organize the tags on the site. We know what the groups are, the question is how to create the most effective taxonomy. – Caleb Jun 27 '14 at 20:45
  • lemme see, maybe 3 points: 1. @curiousdannii was saying he/she didn't know enough about these groups. 2. "this question" was not about the entire taxonomy. nor was it about "a way to organize the tags on the site" any broader than the Anabaptist branch (the title of the question). so how is it not relevant or useful? in what other manner can the previous response be wrong about? (and i thought, reading the moderator-candidate questionaire, that "true" didn't really matter.) – robert bristow-johnson Jun 28 '14 at 3:36
  • I understand you are defensive, but an answer here should support or oppose the tag synonym proposal or propose your own. That is what Caleb was pointing out; that you have not done that. If you wanted to inform curiousdanii you should have commented on the OP, not made an answer here. – fredsbend Jun 30 '14 at 6:16
  • @fredsbend, because my score has been reduced (by 150-200 points) to such a low level, i cannot comment. except on occasion in an "Answer". and not even there. once the censorship was so complete that i had to answer in another question, because not even my answers were allowed. i'm not defensive. Caleb's facts were just wrong. it's hard to accept his "advice" when the facts that it was based on was and is mistaken. – robert bristow-johnson Jun 30 '14 at 15:22
  • Commenting everywhere is only 50 rep. Work to earn it back. You only need 13 more rep to do it. It should be easy. The point about this not supporting nor opposing the tag proposal remains. That is a fact, which Caleb did say in different words. – fredsbend Jun 30 '14 at 15:49
  • i can "work" to "earn" it back. and it can just be taken away again, as it had been repeatedly. and for the wrong reasons. i was not attacking nor disrespecting anyone. and commenting about the censorship is not, in itself, a legitimate reason for more censoring of that comment. the point Caleb makes (about neither supporting nor opposing the tag proposal) is irrelevant to my answer and the reasons Caleb gave were either false or just not germane. – robert bristow-johnson Jun 30 '14 at 16:19

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .