I'm trying to understand the rationale for locking What's the word for something that is purposefully generalised and understated?
As it is, the question is lacking a degree of necessary detail. My immediate response would be to add a comment asking for clarification, and then possibly vote to close it, although, in this case, only if clarification wasn't forthcoming.
It's not possible to provide an answer, because I can interpret the question in several different ways, which only the person who asked it can clarify. And that clarification would normally have to come in comments, or in an edit to the question that has been prompted by comments.
For instance, what's wrong with the word understatement itself, as used in the question? To me, what's being described is understatement; however, I would not provide that as an answer without knowing why it had been rejected.
In its current state, the question merely exists in a kind of limbo until the lock period is over and comments for clarification can finally be posted again. (Unless people want to start providing answers that may or may not be appropriate.)
