I'm often seeing questions challenged with the "answers will be opinion-based" critique. And one poster pointed out that that critique comes from SE's core guidelines.
If so, I think we have a problem. Clearly there are questions that admit of answers that are non-opinion-based -- those whose answers consist of a sutta reference for example. But there are lots more, of interest to me at least and others by the looks of things, that by their very nature are going to be based on opinion.
Are we to restrict questions only to those whose answers consist of references to suttas and more-or-less recognized commentaries? If so, I think it raises a serious question as to the suitability of Buddhism for being an SE site at all.
My suggestion would be that at least in these early stages, we:
- Focus more on up-voting good questions than on critiquing and attempting to close those we don't like and
- Even on those we do consider bad/inappropriate, we use the voting system rather than trying to close
New groups are like new fragile gardens -- easy to kill off stuff. I suggest we err on the side of getting people to ask any questions, and then use gentle voting to guide it all in the right direction. Once we've built momentum, and got a forum "culture" going, including letting the moderators find their feet, then we can more safely close stuff off (if we even need to).