I posted an answer based on an exact quote of a question asker's own clarifying comment.
Why was this deleted by a moderator?
The quote may or may not reflect reality. If the quoted comment is factually accurate, my answer is true and explains the situation. If the quoted information is false, my answer is inapplicable.
Either way, the responsibility for the accuracy of the asker's words and everything logically following from them rests with the asker, not with me.
If a question asker provides false information responses will naturally be inapplicable - but they have no one to blame but themselves.
To clarify the technical issue, the asker has explicitly stated that the regulator bypass path exists only as a result of injecting 5v into a header pin they refuse to identify which is allegedly actually a 3v3 pin mislabeled as a 5v pin, and that there is no bypass pass within the board itself. However, they have also accepted an answer claiming that the bypass path occurs as a result of a resistor on the board. It's worth noting that the schematic shows only a single 5v net appearing on header pins - if some of those are actually 3v3 nets, then the issue is a schematic error, not a resistor configuration as alleged. While if the issue is the resistor, then the claim that the bypass path only exists as a result of external connections to headers is false.
Thus at most one of these two conflicting statements can be true.
It seems to me that if anything should be deleted, it is the self-contradictory question, rather than answers based on taking the asker's words at face value.