user-1: I flagged the answer by Dhammadhatu to the linked question because it contains the phrase "later day corruptions". However, the answer and the offending phrase remain.
Is there any proof of Karma theory & rebirth?
This is a Buddhism site not a Theravadan site, so I fail to see why no action was taken.
Please can a moderator explain the decision in this case, the policy on inter-school dialogue and Dhammadhatu in particular?

user-1: I appreciate the work you're doing Chris, and I like your commitment to a diversity of views. That said, 'corrupt' isn't an acceptable way to describe the Mahayana or Vajrayana, so the moderation criteria could probably do with an update. In light of the current matter, I suggest adding a section as follows:
Please think very carefully before criticising Buddhist teaching (especially the teaching of a school other than your own). If you do criticise teachings:

make sure your criticism is demanded by the question;
be objective;
explain your reasoning (otherwise your criticism is simply dogmatism);
don't cause offense.

In this case I think it's debatable whether the criticism was necessary, but if it was Dhammdatu could have simply said "the Buddha didn't teach reincarnation" and told us what he considered to be the orthodox canon. That would have made the point objectively, given us adequate justification and not offended anyone except possibly some Mahayana or Vajrayana zealots.

-1: <p>I flagged the answer by Dhammadhatu to the linked question because it contains the phrase "later day corruptions". However, the answer and the offending phrase remain.</p>

<p><a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/20942/is-there-any-proof-of-karma-theory-rebirth">Is there any proof of Karma theory &amp; rebirth?</a></p>

<p>This is a Buddhism site not a Theravadan site, so I fail to see why no action was taken.</p>

<p>Please can a moderator explain the decision in this case, the policy on inter-school dialogue and Dhammadhatu in particular?</p>
 -1: <p>I appreciate the work you're doing Chris, and I like your commitment to a diversity of views. That said, 'corrupt' isn't an acceptable way to describe the Mahayana or Vajrayana, so the moderation criteria could probably do with an update. In light of the current matter, I suggest adding a section as follows:</p>

<p>Please think very carefully before criticising Buddhist teaching (especially the teaching of a school other than your own). If you do criticise teachings:</p>

<ul>
<li>make sure your criticism is demanded by the question;</li>
<li>be objective;</li>
<li>explain your reasoning (otherwise your criticism is simply dogmatism);</li>
<li>don't cause offense.</li>
</ul>

<p>In this case I think it's debatable whether the criticism was necessary, but if it was Dhammdatu could have simply said "the Buddha didn't teach reincarnation" and told us what he considered to be the orthodox canon. That would have made the point objectively, given us adequate justification and not offended anyone except possibly some Mahayana or Vajrayana zealots.</p>
