Is there disconnect between what you say and what you do when moderating?

Question

Posting this here, I also posted this as an answer to a question linked below, so people could see the screenshots. My point in posting here is to ask this question:

Do the people who moderate this site think there's a disconnect between what the site docs tell users to ask, and the criticism they give to users when they say their questions are off-topic?

In relation to this question I asked here on Meta:

Is the unofficial welcome message unique to hermeneutics.stackexchange.com

And this question on Beta:

What divides Doctrine from Tradition in Christianity and other faiths?

---

Just in case there's any confusion, when you tell people questions are off-topic and they should read the tour page, here's what they see:

On the "how to ask a question page" is "Questions that do not arise from a Biblical text are off-topic unless they are about hermeneutical approaches"

Answer 1

Your Primary Question

Your main question here is:

Do the people who moderate this site think there's a disconnect between what the site docs tell users to ask, and the criticism they give to users when they say their questions are off-topic?

The answer to that is: NO, at least not typically. Looking around on Meta, one can see that various things have been discussed related to topicality on the site, so what any particular user may criticize as off-topic or agree is on-topic may not match what the consensus holds.

The primary issue with your question is that it does not ask about:

1. interpretation of a verse, or
2. the philosophy, methodology, history, etc., of a particular hermeneutic.

Your question asks about:

1. interpretation of two religious concepts and their distinction: doctrine and tradition, and
2. then attempt to make it on topic by asking, "What is the hermeneutics approach to this question?"

The first part, the distinction, is not tied to a Bible verse, so it cannot be answered on the basis of either an interpretation of a text or the historical context of a text, because not text is given.

The second part betrays some misunderstanding of what hermeneutics means. There is no "the hermeneutics approach" (emphasis added) to any question, because there is not any one hermeneutic. There are a multitude of hermeneutics, each of which might handle that question differently—but more importantly, your question, unless it can be tied back to a question based in Scripture, would still not qualify by changing it to how "the various hermeneutics approach" it, because Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange only applies hermeneutics to Biblical and related texts deemed on topic.

Hermeneutic approach questions without reference to verses do not themselves ask about interpretations of anything, but rather about philosophy or methods those particular hermeneutics use.

Your Follow-up Question

Now, you have a related follow up on the Beta question in a comment, where you ask:

Can someone explain why this question is so well received and on topic, but mine is not?

Superficially, I believe you are seeing that the other question asks about a word, "Midrash," much like your question is asking about a couple of words, "Doctrine" and "Tradition." You are also seeing that this question relates Midrash to Christianity, much as your question is seeking an answer related to also to Christianity.

But the difference is this: "Midrash is a method of interpreting biblical stories that goes beyond simple distillation of religious, legal, or moral teachings" (Wikipedia, accessed 1/27/2016; emphasis added). Midrash itself is a hermeneutic approach, so it is on-topic because of that. Doctrine and tradition are not hermeneutic approaches, so they are off-topic.