To @Dan specifically, because his comments are being presented here, but generally, to all who behave in like manner.
Here are Dan's comments attached to my answer concerning Interpretations of Elihu in Job
Revelation has no place in a question about Job. This is not a Christian site. We stick to the text (in its original context) and must show work for going beyond this. More than a perceived topic must be shared when citing other texts outside of the work asked about (i.e we don't proof-text - stick to the historical, linguistic, and literary aspects of the text - not later religious interpretation)
To which I replied:
@Dan I agree. Thanks. I appreciate "greatly" your constructive comment
He had clearly stated his objection to what he regarded as a Christian point of view, and I was happy to accommodate it.
However, when I realised he had downvoted my answer, I said:
I just noticed the downvote from you. I think there is a significant degree of high handedness happing on this site. What do you think I would have done to my answer, if you had've just commented WITHOUT the downvote. I would have removed the inappropriate reference myself. You would then have taught me something valuable and my answer would no longer be downvotable. You guys should be TEACHERS in the first instance and EDITORS in the second.
To which, he replied (emphasis mine):
my down vote is for this not really doing much to elucidate the original historical, linguistic, or literary context of this passage. Rather than citing scholarly research, it is merely speculative (plus it imposes a much later Christian worldview on the text evidenced by your citation of 'You know, "All have sinned an fallen short of the glory of God".' -which is from the New Testament). My DV and edit are unrelated, however. My edit was to bring this in line with the site policy of showing work, the comment as well. The DV is because as a regular user I don't find this answer helpful.
Firstly: this is such pompous nonsense. This site is not an academic site, and there is nothing that requires anyone to format their answers as if they were presenting a thesis.
Secondly: he still hadn't let go of the reason for his downvote. It's there taking up 1/3 of the space in his comment. But, it was then only a phantom reason.
Thirdly: the last sentence of his comment is really pulling the standards of this site down, and he should repent in dust and ashes for having written it.
He is telling me and the whole community of members here, that regular users should follow his lead and downvote any answer they personally don't find helpful. Come on, guys! I know a banner advertising that as a foundation stone upon which this site is built, would certainly not be helpful in attracting new members to the site.
He then said:
Again the bur under his saddle was confirmed by the destination of his link, but he had already removed the reference that caused him pain.
The behaviour of some of the senior members on this site does the site no credit at all. Dan and Susan and Caleb should be setting a better example to follow than downvote-any-question-that-you-don't-personally-find-helpful.