I've just joined this site and have had 2 of my answers deleted by wax eagle and both were questions that touched upon Calvinism, and my answers were clearly not from a Calvinistic perspective. Though I did answer these questions fairly, and they were relevant to the questions. One deletion was given a reason that I think was unfair, due to the broadened scope in the questioners inquiry (more details than just what was in the title) that would've allowed more than a Calvinistic view, and that was only after I gave first the Calvinistic view. The other deletion, no reason was given, and again it seems because I provided not a Calvinistic perspective, but it didn't need to be, as the whole answer given was directly related to what the questioner was seeking. I can understand down voting it as poor, but just deleting answers that someone took the time and thought and in a genuinely concerned manner in actually attempting to give a relevant and helpful answer to the questioner, it's quite disheartening, especially for someone who was feeling optimistic in joining and contributing to this site. Though now it feels like I'm being unfairly discredited for having an alternate perspective, because it doesn't completely align with others reformed positions.
-
7To add to what David says below, answers are expected to give the perspective requested. If the question asked for a Calvinist perspective and you responded that Calvinists are wrong because of X, then it is an off-topic answer. (I say this not knowing the exact details.) We aren't interested in deciding who is right, but instead only documenting what groups of Christians believe.– ThaddeusBSep 23, 2015 at 14:15
-
6Basically, if a question asks for a Calvinist perspective, you need to answer from a Calvinist perspective. If it asks for an Arminian perspective, you need to answer from an Arminian perspective. If it asks for a Calvinist perspective and you want to answer from an Arminian perspective, you can ask a new question and then answer it yourself. Yes, that's allowed, and even encouraged. Just make sure the question and answer are able to stand alone, without reference to other posts on the site.– Mr. BultitudeSep 23, 2015 at 19:53
-
1One asked in the title a Calvinist view, which I gave to start the answer, the rest was responding to the broader questions asked in his post, and the second question was not Calvinist specific, though I gave a non Calvinistic perspective, and no reason was given for that deletion. I'll just accept that I possibly didn't answer in the correct format, and will try harder next time to do so. Thanks for your insights, and time.– Matt ClarkSep 24, 2015 at 0:26
-
2I'd also like to apologize to wax eagle for any offending insinuations, and for being too presumptuous.– Matt ClarkSep 24, 2015 at 0:55
2 Answers
I just read through all of your deleted answers, and it appears that you've made the same mistake about this site as I did when I first joined. Your answers weren't deleted because anyone disagrees with them theologically. They were deleted because they were phrased as your own observations/opinions/beliefs.Your posts look like something better suited to a discussion forum. To clarify a common misconception, this isn't a discussion forum. It's a Q and A site with a very specific format. Answers are not to be used to put opinions or make comments/observations, but rather well-sourced answers as to what is taught by some group within Christianity.
I want to encourage you to participate, but it looks like you may need some help in getting the site. With that in mind, I'd like to encourage you to take a look at the following posts.
-
2Alright, thanks for taking the time and looking into it. I'll have to try to better understand the fundamentals of this site. It seemed fishy that they were both non Calvinistic answers and the moderator is a Calvinist, but I'll accept it as my fault for not responding correctly. Thanks again. Sep 24, 2015 at 0:23
Just a couple comments in addition to David's answer which certainly covers the basics.
As one one of the moderators who deleted a couple of your answers I'd like to reiterate that the motivation for this was not theological. As it happens I am a Calvinist: one of two moderators with a strong Reformed bent. There is also a Mormon and a couple other folks with different leanings. But none of that actually matters because this site is not moderated on the basis of theology. If I'm messing up on that I'd be happy for somebody to call me out on it, but I'm pretty confident that's not what's going on here.
I've personally deleted hundreds of posts that did match my personal theological beliefs because they didn't match the questions they were posted under. By far the most common case I see here is posts under Catholic questions that criticize Catholicism rather than answer questions from its perspective. I regularly chip in as a moderator to clean up these off topic answers even when I happen to agree with the viewpoint they represent. Throughout the history of this site I've consistently defended the rights of viewpoints which I believe are heretical to participate with questions directed at and answers from their own perspectives.
The answer of yours that was deleted without any commentary was:
on a question that got closed because the question wasn't appropriate for this site. Answers on closed questions are often removed to avoid controversy discussing content that doesn't even belong and where proper answers cannot be added.
not even an answer. It had zero content that actually answered the question, it was just a link to an off-site resource. These posts (regardless of their the theology involved) don't qualify as answers. We encourage linking to additional resources but answers do have to answer the question in the space of the post.
In my opinion the reason you perceived this "bias" has less to do with the theology of the moderators and more to do with your own biases. Because of your own beliefs you were consistently posting answers from that direction without considering how the site worked. If you had been posting answers against Catholicism instead you would have come to the conclusion that the moderator bias was towards Catholicism instead of Calvinism. I have in fact personally been accused of being a heretic for supporting the Pope, etc. etc. in the course of my moderator duties. This has happened multiple times. The people making these accusations were only basing their view on the fact that I was deleting their posts ranting against Catholicism without noticing that I was in fact in agreement with them theologically but that their posts were out of scope for the questions they were answering.
If having this in mind you do continue to perceive a theological bias is moderator activities feel free to bring it up here on Meta again. This is the correct place for the community to review how the moderators are acting and judge if they are in lines with site guidelines or not. For the moment I believe the actions you encountered are fully explained by the nature of the posts themselves more than the theological beliefs of the moderators handling them.
-
1