Q:

No reviews for me but the answer is near deletion

This is the second time this has happened over the last week. I reviewed this answer where the submitter admitted his posting is not an answer, and I voted to delete it for that reason. It now has four votes for deletion, but I am not allowed to do any more reviews, because I reviewed it "incorrectly". Why is that?

You reviewed
  https://stackoverflow.com/review/low-quality-posts/19453235
  incorrectly. Please pay more attention to each review in the future.
Come back in 4 days to continue reviewing.

A:

The topic of when to flag answers as 'not an answer' has been hashed out time and time again.  
That last link directly applies here. 
Now - the confusion here - is due to the author self-proclaiming that it "doesn't really answer the question". Unsurprisingly, this comment is likely what prompted reviewers to cast their (recommend) delete votes. 
An incorrect answer is not a valid reason to handle or cast an NAA flag.
Moderators even have a standard decline reason for flags: "flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer".
I issued review bans here, as I felt it necessary to notify the reviewers that they're doing it wrong. I probably should have included a link to Undo's fantastic post in the ban message... but unfortunately, I didn't. Incorrectly reviewing this type of content is sending the wrong message to the flaggers themselves - causing more people to misunderstand how and when to properly flag answers.

A:

Taking the time to read the question and answer in more detail: I'm not opposed to the result, but I was not convinced by Rob ♦'s explanation, so let me post my own.
The question can be simplified to

Should I do A, or B?

The answer can be simplified to

Personally, I do C instead.

Now, this should be taken as an answer to the question. Not just an answer to some other hypothetical question, it should be taken as an answer to the actual question that was asked. It was not very high quality yet in that form, but could easily be improved through editing. I don't think there's much disagreement on this site that

Neither, you should do C instead.

qualifies as an answer, but the main information in that is the same, so that's an improvement that could have been made without any involvement from the OP.
Depending on how obvious C is, this may or may not require an explanation to become a high-quality answer. Had the OP not already been chased off the site by the comments (very much not OK), a simple request could easily have made that happen.

A:

Something has gone terribly wrong with SO when we review-ban people for deleting trash from the site.
I can't really tell if the question is valid or asking for opinions, since I don't know the topic. The discussed answer is however clearly just someone's opinion, provided without any arguments or explanation. As such it holds no value to preserve. 
And that's it. If someone casts a delete vote on this answer, it is a good thing. If they somehow do it while stating the wrong reason, who cares. As long as the crap is removed from the site.
The purpose of this site is to produce quality programming-related Q&A. 
It is not to create a searchable database of incorrect, down-voted answers.  
But as soon as the meta inquisition unexpectedly rushes in, the purpose of the site is soon forgotten. Before you know it, there's a huge debate: is the crap post is really an answer, does it attempt to answer the question even if horribly, what was the intention of the poster, did they really use the right flag. Blah blah blah. Various meta lawyers offer their insight from ivory towers. The inner meaning of various flags and policies are dissected.
Suddenly the purpose of the original post is no longer programming-related, high quality Q&A. Instead it starts to exist only to sate meta policies. It must be preserved for the sake of meta. The fact that the post holds no technical value doesn't matter any longer.
If the moderators have nothing better to do than review-banning people for deleting trash, then clearly something has gone terribly wrong with how the site is moderated.

