user13694: I asked the question: "How do we know complete liberation from dukkha is possible?" a few hours ago. On it, I've seen two answers that look (at least to me) as if they are answering by questioning my motivation for asking in the first place.
Is that kind of answers acceptable?
As far as I know, this site is not a place for preaching, and this kind of answers seems like a kind of indirect preach (because I don't feel that such questions are asked to make more precise and clear the OP).
I'm not saying that the advice given isn't useful or well-intended, because I think it is: under buddhist criteria, letting go is a really good advice, instead of mere "brain-masturbation" about philosophical questions that could only lead to vexation and proliferation. I agree on that.
But in my specific post, I'm not asking for advice for myself. If the ones advicing (if that's what they are doing in their answers, and if I'm misunderstanding) want to know about purpose of my question: I was trying to gain some perspective on the issue mentioned in the OP in order to have better informed answers in the future, specifically for people with inclination for philosophical discussion. If I were to say to him "let go, stop that brain-masturbation" to his question (on my justification on my conviction on Nibbana), that would not help him, or could even be counterproductive.
I know the above given information about my motivation is irrelevant and beyond the point of this general question on meta. I just wanted to inform you.
What should be done in these cases?
Should this kind of answers be critized, discouraged and/or downvoted? Are they ok and they are allowed as one of the recommended ways to answer a question? Am I misunderstading those answers?
I'd appreciate any indication on this matter.
Thanks in advance for your time!

user254: I suppose our site-specific policy which most clearly matches this case is Answers vs Advice which I summarise as,


The best answers deal directly and solely with the question(s) specifically asked
Avoid invalidating the question with answers of the form "That's the wrong question..."
In general, unless you actually are the questioner's teacher, don't assume a teacher's mantle.


This was very popular policy so "we" (users who answer questions here) should try to implement it.
As a moderator however I have been reluctant to enforce it unilaterally (i.e. by deciding by myself to delete "answers" which seem to offer advice like this). My reluctance is for several reasons:

Moderators aren't supposed to be a judge of whether an answer is correct
The canon itself (e.g. sutta) sometimes gives this kind of advice instead of trying to answer directly (as you mentioned in the OP about "vexation" etc.), for example in MN 2 -- so IMO that is or might be seen as a canonical answer or type of answer for certain types of question
I see my role as moderator as trying to let the site run, to let people ask and answer questions, with a minimum of hostility, ill-feeling, argument. I think sometimes it's easier to ignore (or tolerate, overlook) what you might consider to be a not-very-satisfying non-answer, than it would be to censor/delete that answer and then justify or explain why you did that. My experience has been that if someone's answer is deleted even once they may not accept that willingly, and carry a grudge for months etc.
Sometimes I too wonder why a user is asking a question, in case that helps to understand what they're asking. Although, asking the user, "What and why are you asking?" ought to be a comment under the question, it's not an answer.

The one time I will act to delete that kind of answer unilaterally is when it's based on sectarianism, for example an answer like, "You shouldn't ask a question about Mahayana doctrine because only Theravada doctrine is true" or vice versa.
Given that I sometimes (or often) don't choose to enforce this as a policy:

Perhaps another moderator will
I'm more inclined to delete an answer if the community downvotes it -- see the answers to Moderating answers which don't answer the question? -- in any case if you think an answer isn't useful then you as a user should downvote it
The person who asked the question is especially able to decide whether their question was answered, whether they found an answer useful or not useful. If something isn't an answer to your question then you might try to flag it for moderator's attention, as well as downvoting it, if you do then perhaps then I will reconsider whether to delete it.


13694: <p>I asked the question: <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/41684/how-do-we-know-attaining-complete-liberation-from-dukkha-is-possible">&quot;How do we know complete liberation from dukkha is possible?&quot;</a> a few hours ago. On it, I've seen two answers that look (at least to me) as if they are answering by questioning my motivation for asking in the first place.</p>
<p>Is that kind of answers acceptable?</p>
<p>As far as I know, this site is not a place for preaching, and this kind of answers seems like a kind of indirect preach (because I don't feel that such questions are asked to make more precise and clear the OP).</p>
<p>I'm not saying that the advice given isn't useful or well-intended, because I think it is: under buddhist criteria, letting go is a really good advice, instead of mere &quot;<em>brain-masturbation</em>&quot; about philosophical questions that could only lead to vexation and proliferation. I agree on that.</p>
<p>But in my specific post, I'm not asking for advice for myself. If the ones advicing (if that's what they are doing in their answers, and if I'm misunderstanding) want to know about purpose of my question: I was trying to gain some perspective on the issue mentioned in the OP in order to have better informed answers in the future, specifically for people with inclination for philosophical discussion. If I were to say to him &quot;let go, stop that <em>brain-masturbation</em>&quot; to his question (on my justification on my conviction on Nibbana), that would not help him, or could even be counterproductive.</p>
<p>I know the above given information about my motivation is irrelevant and beyond the point of this general question on <em>meta</em>. I just wanted to inform you.</p>
<p><strong>What should be done in these cases?
Should this kind of answers be critized, discouraged and/or downvoted? Are they ok and they are allowed as one of the recommended ways to answer a question? Am I misunderstading those answers?</strong></p>
<p>I'd appreciate any indication on this matter.</p>
<p>Thanks in advance for your time!</p>
 254: <p>I suppose our site-specific policy which most clearly matches this case is <a href="https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/q/61/254">Answers vs Advice</a> which I summarise as,</p>
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>The best answers deal directly and solely with the question(s) specifically asked</li>
<li>Avoid invalidating the question with answers of the form &quot;That's the wrong question...&quot;</li>
<li>In general, unless you actually are the questioner's teacher, don't assume a teacher's mantle.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>This was very popular policy so &quot;we&quot; (users who answer questions here) should try to implement it.</p>
<p>As a moderator however I have been reluctant to enforce it unilaterally (i.e. by deciding by myself to delete &quot;answers&quot; which seem to offer advice like this). My reluctance is for several reasons:</p>
<ul>
<li>Moderators aren't supposed to be a judge of whether an answer is correct</li>
<li>The canon itself (e.g. sutta) sometimes gives this kind of advice instead of trying to answer directly (as you mentioned in the OP about &quot;vexation&quot; etc.), for example in <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">MN 2</a> -- so IMO that is or might be seen as a canonical answer or type of answer for certain types of question</li>
<li>I see my role as moderator as trying to let the site run, to let people ask and answer questions, with a minimum of hostility, ill-feeling, argument. I think sometimes it's easier to ignore (or tolerate, overlook) what you might consider to be a not-very-satisfying non-answer, than it would be to censor/delete that answer and then justify or explain why you did that. My experience has been that if someone's answer is deleted even once they may not accept that willingly, and carry a grudge for months etc.</li>
<li>Sometimes I too wonder why a user is asking a question, in case that helps to understand what they're asking. Although, asking the user, &quot;What and why are you asking?&quot; ought to be a comment under the question, it's not an answer.</li>
</ul>
<p>The one time I will act to delete that kind of answer unilaterally is when it's based on sectarianism, for example an answer like, &quot;You shouldn't ask a question about Mahayana doctrine because only Theravada doctrine is true&quot; or vice versa.</p>
<p>Given that I sometimes (or often) don't choose to enforce this as a policy:</p>
<ul>
<li>Perhaps another moderator will</li>
<li>I'm more inclined to delete an answer if the community downvotes it -- see the answers to <a href="https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1676/254">Moderating answers which don&#39;t answer the question?</a> -- in any case if you think an answer isn't useful then you as a user should downvote it</li>
<li>The person who asked the question is especially able to decide whether their question was answered, whether they found an answer useful or not useful. If something isn't an answer to your question then you might try to flag it for moderator's attention, as well as downvoting it, if you do then perhaps then I will reconsider whether to delete it.</li>
</ul>
