I find the question "Is Brahma a post" deeply offensive. There maybe sects to which this is fine - but the question should be explicitly limited to "Does sect X believe Brahma is a post"?

Attaining the Post of Brahma

Similarly, others might find this 'self-accepted' answer "Abhimanyu's killing was totally dharmic. As Shakespeare would say - the Abhimanyu partisan doth protest too much, methinks" deeply offensive.
There maybe sects to which this is fine - but the answer should be explicitly limited to "Does sect X believe Abhimanyu's killing was dharmic"?

I find the question "Is Brahma a post" deeply offensive. There maybe sects for whom this would be fine - but the question should be explicitly limited to "Does sect X believe Brahma is a post"?

Attaining the Post of Brahma

Similarly, answers or parts of answers that only represent the views of only some sects should be explicitly noted as such.

I find the question "Is Brahma a post" deeply offensive. There maybe sects to which this is fine - but the question should be explicitly limited to "Does sect X believe Brahma is a post"?

Attaining the Post of Brahma

I find the question "Is Brahma a post" deeply offensive. There maybe sects to which this is fine - but the question should be explicitly limited to "Does sect X believe Brahma is a post"?

Attaining the Post of Brahma

Similarly, others might find this 'self-accepted' answer "Abhimanyu's killing was totally dharmic. As Shakespeare would say - the Abhimanyu partisan doth protest too much, methinks" deeply offensive.
There maybe sects to which this is fine - but the answer should be explicitly limited to "Does sect X believe Abhimanyu's killing was dharmic"?