Return to Question

This question, which I posted today was put on hold within a couple of hours of its posting, seemingly based on my answer to another question on Meta and possibly, my interactions with a moderator on that answer.

What is wrong or offensive about this question? As far as I can tell, it wasn't even anti-piety. "Rationalist" is not a pejorative term. The opposite of rationalist, whatever that may be, is also not negative either. So, nobody should perceive insult in this question.

Please cite the rules that are violated by this question, resulting in its being put on hold. If it is considered a duplicate to any question, which question might that be?

My views as a questioner: Each question needs to be discussed or debated on its own merit. Perceptions about the questioner should not influence the moderators' treatment of a question. Let the participating community speak their own mind by upvoting or downvoting, answers or comments. If they cannot relate to a question, they will completely ignore it. Even negative answers and downvotes indicate that the question connects with the community of site users; why censor such a question or the reactions to it?

This question, which I posted today was put on hold within a couple of hours of its posting, seemingly based on my answer to another question on Meta and possibly, my interactions with a moderator on that answer.

What is wrong or offensive about this question? As far as I can tell, it wasn't even anti-piety. "Rationalist" is not a pejorative term. The opposite of rationalist, whatever that may be, is also not negative either. So, nobody should perceive insult in this question.

Please cite the rules that are violated by this question, resulting in its being put on hold. If it is considered a duplicate to any question, which question might that be?

My views as a questioner: Each question needs to be discussed or debated on its own merit. Perceptions about the questioner should not influence the moderators' treatment of a question. Let the participating community speak their own mind by upvoting or downvoting, answers or comments. If they cannot relate to a question, they will completely ignore it. Even negative answers and downvotes indicate that the question connects with the community of site users; why censor such a question or the reactions to it?

This question, which I posted today was put on hold within a couple of hours of its posting, seemingly based on my answer to another question on Meta and possibly, my interactions with a moderator on that answer.

What is wrong or offensive about this question? As far as I can tell, it wasn't even anti-piety. "Rationalist" is not a pejorative term. The opposite of rationalist, whatever that may be, is also not negative either. So, nobody should perceive insult in this question.

Please cite the rules that are violated by this question, resulting in its being put on hold. If it is considered a duplicate to any question, which question might that be?

My views as a questioner: Each question needs to be discussed or debated on its own merit. Perceptions about the questioner should not influence the moderators' treatment of a question. Let the participating community speak their own mind by upvoting or downvoting, answers or comments. If they cannot relate to a question, they will completely ignore it. Even negative answers and downvotes indicate that the question connects with the community of site users; why censor such a question or the reactions to it?

This question, which I posted today was put on hold within a couple of hours of its posting, seemingly based on my answer to another question on Meta and possibly, my interactions with a moderator on that answer.

What is wrong or offensive about this question? As far as I can tell, it wasn't even anti-piety. "Rationalist" is not a pejorative term. The opposite of rationalist, whatever that may be, is also not negative either. So, nobody should perceive insult in this question.

Please cite the rules that are violated by this question, resulting in its being put on hold. If it is considered a duplicate to any question, which question might that be?

My views as a questioner: Each question needs to be discussed or debated on its own merit. Perceptions about the questioner should not influence the moderators' treatment of a question. Let the participating community speak their own mind by upvoting or downvoting, answers or comments. If they cannot relate to a question, they will completely ignore it. Even negative answers and downvotes indicate that the question connects with the community of site users; why censor such a question or the reactions to it?

This question, which I posted today was put on hold within a couple of hours of its posting, seemingly based on my answer to another question on Meta and possibly, my interactions with a moderator on that answer.

What is wrong or offensive about this question? As far as I can tell, it wasn't even anti-piety. "Rationalist" is not a pejorative term. The opposite of rationalist, whatever that may be, is also not negative either. So, nobody should perceive insult in this question.

Please cite the rules that are violated by this question, resulting in its being put on hold. If it is considered a duplicate to any question, which question might that be?

My views as a questioner: Each question needs to be discussed or debated on its own merit. Perceptions about the questioner should not be a consideration for the moderators' treatment of a question. Let the participating public speak their own mind by upvoting or downvoting, answers or comments. If they cannot relate to a question, they will completely ignore it, and only if they relate to it will they give positive or negative answers and votes.

This question, which I posted today was put on hold within a couple of hours of its posting, seemingly based on my answer to another question on Meta and possibly, my interactions with a moderator on that answer.

What is wrong or offensive about this question? As far as I can tell, it wasn't even anti-piety. "Rationalist" is not a pejorative term. The opposite of rationalist, whatever that may be, is also not negative either. So, nobody should perceive insult in this question.

Please cite the rules that are violated by this question, resulting in its being put on hold. If it is considered a duplicate to any question, which question might that be?

My views as a questioner: Each question needs to be discussed or debated on its own merit. Perceptions about the questioner should not influence the moderators' treatment of a question. Let the participating community speak their own mind by upvoting or downvoting, answers or comments. If they cannot relate to a question, they will completely ignore it. Even negative answers and downvotes indicate that the question connects with the community of site users; why censor such a question or the reactions to it?