I am posting this question because I have observed a fundamental problem in the way questions and answers are handled on this site. StackExchange is modelled after StackOverflow which is a Q&A site for computer programming related questions. The beauty of Computer Programming is that no matter what code you write, a same compiler or interpreter will always interpret a single result or conclusion no matter where you run it. So, if a suggested answer/solution has a flaw, everyone can find out without any ambiguity or confusion.
As opposed to religious doctrines where we have so many variations, schools and sects. I have seen some great and well respected scholars always in disagreement somewhere down the path with each-other, and there seem no end to the feud. There is clear evidence of dispute among classical scholars such as Iman Shafi vs Iman Hanafi etc. Iman Jafar vs Iman Zaidi and even Iman Ghazali vs Ibn-Rushd. The same fued exists even today among prominent modern figures such as Al-Albani vs Al-Buti and even Dr. Zakir Naik vs Dr. Muhammad Salah or Dr. Tahirul-Qadri.
I do acknowledge that this is a community-run website and a community may not always agree with each-other. This phenomena in specific is a problem especially when you try to apply the model of StackOverflow. Since the person who answers a question regarding Islam, there is no way on which everyone would mutually agree to verify the validity just like you do with computer-programming. Because something labelled right by one school/sect is labelled wrong or is different in another school/sect. Unless the answer giver explicitly mentions the school/sect in the description there is going to be a problem relating to that answer. Even if the info related to school or sect is mentioned, there are even further divisions down below and all the opposing members come rushing down to down vote the answer. Still there is an option of Upvote, so members of the same group/sect could either down vote or upvote to keep the balance, which is good.
However, A major problem which is specific to this site: There are a handful of very active like-minded members who have somehow made it to the ranks of highly privileged moderators and are very active to endorse and enforce their view of Islam which frankly isn't a generalised view but rather specific. Their behaviour suggests they are inspired from Salafism, Wahabism and Petro-Islamic ideology and are vehemently trying to impose it their own secretive way.
These moderators together have a monopoly to control, influence or even intimidate what remains on the website and what's not. They would down-vote any answer that they would not agree with to a point where the answer gets deleted. I have often seen answers which are more inclined towards Sufism or answers which are a bit liberal getting down voted. This specific group of moderators have formed an alliance. They promote each other and demote every one else who happen to have a different view. As a result we see the following:
Just like in a real world a traditional mullah or radical jihadist hijack the Islamic faith and manipulate it to obtain his preferred agenda, I am seeing somewhat similar behaviour here, however in a very cunning and evasive way, I-e not coming under the radar.
New Members of Islam SE who post content, with which these moderators would not agree are discouraged as the alliance of these moderators come down on them to do everything in their power to intimidate and subdue them. Which leads the opposing side astray from gaining any interest towards contributing to this site and eventually they leave the website.
Even if I post this question here on Meta, some of these moderators, if not all will try to prove me wrong by applying the same tactics that they use on the main site. If I am wrong I will accept but right now I think I am right. I hope the neutral people would be able to tell.
I have some solutions to tackle this problem. But I'll post this question to see the response, and based on that I will proceed forward.