I [posted on Super User about a rather particular issue about Windows 10 behaving *very* awkwardly to the point where I'd call the issue a bug](https://superuser.com/questions/1414055/shares-in-windows-keep-returning-after-being-disabled), since traditional methods of how you would normally fix this problem do nothing in my case.

Since I wrote the original question very badly, contextually and structurally of course everybody assumed I am not very sophisticated with technology or put zero to no effort into researching the problem, hence downvoting the question and upvoting comments with the intent of me bettering my question.

I tried to cater additional information to all comments as fast as possible and did a complete overhaul on the post.

Which I all understand. Questions on Stack Exchange should be compact, not beating around the bush, informative and educational. I love Stack Exchange's policy and therefore the site for this behaviour, because it results in a lot of quality content.

Where this kind of bit me in the ass though was when I was trying to damage-control the question by providing more context about *me and my knowledge* so that I could explain to the already few users that kept an eye on the thread would understand where I was coming from, explaining that I am actually pretty in-touch with a lot of things being a software developer and all that jazz.

Since this does not add any value to the question when breaking the post down into the crucial essentials, a moderator removed that section from my post. 

**Which, I can't really say anything against, since it's very conform with SE's policies, but in return ultimately absolutely graveyarded my question with -4 votes and sub 50 views.**

So, this puts me in a dead lock. I seriously do not know how to approach this situation since the post is 100% dead, but also written as best as possible.