There is a recent question about an argument concerning veganism.
I wrote a short answer
Well, you started:
"In fact, not all wines are vegan"
Just don't make controversial (that people won't believe) statements if you're not prepared to defend them.
Yes, you're right, wine isn't always (or often not) vegan. But you corrected someone with a statement others found unbelievable and then weren't able to back it up.
“I don't want alcohol“ would have been fine.
asserting that OP had started an argument with a claim others found hard to believe without beeing able to supply arguments backing the claim up.
In my opinion, OP didn't see how their own behaviour contributed to the situation and instead wanted a solution as how to make others believe what they said. The problem beeing, they were just spreading something they believed to be right, without actually knowing it.
Which I pointed out in a short answer, because, again, in my opinion, OP just needed to change their point of view to see the real conflict.
Now, this wouldn't have been a problem if the question hadn't hit HNQ. But it did. 20 minutes later, someone else supplied the same answer with a few more explanations.
Days later, OP edited the question, essentially proving my point (though apparently judging it differently and not agreeing).
The argument wasn't about me being vegan/not drinking wine. It was about them note believing my statement ("not all wines are vegan") which I couldn't backup with precise and complete details (just a vague "animal products are used during the manufacturing process"). Details that they asked for. And since I didn't had enough details, they were laughing in disbelief while not carrying enough to fact-check.
At around the same time, I got comments from 2 mods first telling me to back up my answer with more evidence - which would have made it a complete duplicate of the above linked later answer - and then telling me my answer was a duplicate and would now be deleted.
Apparently, this earlier answer has the same content as my answer. (The other, later answer I linked to above has the same comment but hasn't been deleted yet).
It has the same conclusion
I don't really like alcohol anyway, so it's okay.
but a completely different reasoning.
This emphases your requirement is to check online first before you can accept anything. If they're laughing at you at this stage for wanting to be sure in your beliefs, it might be a form of bullying and not healthy social situation. They wouldn't laugh if a Jewish person wanted to check if something was Kosher, so why would they laugh at you for wanting to check something is vegan?
This answer is telling OP it's okay to "belief" something without having the facts, essentially mixing facts (is wine vegan) with beliefs (veganism). In my opinion, nobody actually cared about wine beeing vegan or not, if I tell someone "the sky is black, not blue" and then supply as proof "well, that's how it is, why don't you look it up?", you're going to have a bad time. Of course, that is my opinion, there is no scientific study that I know of proving this nor is OP obligated to try it out. However the number of upvotes my answer got at least proves others are of the same opinion - a good indicator in social situations.
Yes, the solution - don't mention wine not beeing vegan - is the same as in other answers. The reason however, is a different one. Anyways, my answer, and probably the other answer I linked to, are getting deleted as duplicates.
Which leads me to my question - is an answer with a different reasoning a duplicate and should be deleted? Or was my answer deleted for a different reason?