<p><strong>The deleted answer has been restored.</strong></p>

<p>I am guessing that <strong>the deletion of that post was a well-meaning response</strong> to a (well-upvoted) comment by a community member claiming that it did <em>not</em> answer the question.  Subsequent edits to the answer appear to have addressed that comment, but evidently they were overlooked by <em>another</em> community member who flagged the post as irrelevant.  At that point a moderator responded to the flag, most likely saw the upvoted negative comments, and perhaps made a judgment without reading through the entire post.</p>

<p><strong>It does not matter who those community members were,</strong> nor who the moderator was: our site works based on trust in the well-meaning and competence of those who earn the privileges to moderate and curate its material.  I am certain everyone involved was acting on behalf of this community.  Let us therefore seek not to cast blame but to improve.  In this case I appreciate everyone's persistence in pursuing the issue, but would like to suggest that the same results likely could have been achieved much sooner and with less trouble by means of a suitable flag: in fact, it was @amoeba's flag four hours ago that first brought this issue to my attention.</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>In the interest of seeking a constructive outcome from this incident,</strong> I would note that when one merely appends an edit at the end of a long post without changing the original, many readers will never get as far as the edit and will make their judgments based on what they read at the beginning.  It's always a good idea to <em>structure</em> your posts--questions and answers--so that the first few lines tell readers what is coming.  Furthermore, when you want to improve a post, <em>change</em> it rather than leaving the old material around to invite downvotes or worse. </p>
