13
Option 1: Continue what we do now
Let's continue to edit the subjective questions we can to make them work for our site, continue to use the reference-request tag, and do not require answers to have citations. Questions which do not meet our Subjective Questions guideline will be closed.
Pros
No change from what we do now
No strict citation requirement ...
13
Yes, we should adopt a homework policy and introduce a new "no-effort homework" reason to close a question.
12
Option 2: Continue what we do now, but focus on answers
Let's continue to edit the subjective questions we can to make them work for our site and continue to use the reference-request tag. Questions which do not meet our Subjective Questions guideline will be closed. In addition, answers without sources, references, or citations will be challenged and ...
7
This has been addressed many times, the bottom line is that the admins feel the current system is the best option and mods of individual sites have no power to change things like this. At best it could be made as a "community best practice" if there is total consensus, but I doubt we'd ever get that.
META SE: So annoyed with no-comment, vindictive ...
6
I, personally, am very much in favour of this possibility.
It has become a common trope that we have to heavily moderate comments and answers, sometimes simply because of people becoming involved, other times because of them going off the rails.
This is often linked to the nature of the question itself. In a sense, this is a self-reinforcing process: ...
5
If I understand your question correctly, you are asking: "By what set of rules are questions evaluated in order to determine whether they are fit for this site?"
In that case, you can refer to these guidelines which were written by the people that run this website:
What topics can I ask about here?
How do I ask a good question?
What types of ...
3
This network-wide issue was resolved here: https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/318833/235711
3
I think this is much better as written. I have nominated it for reopening.
Note that when you wrote:
When one tries to explain and understand the origins of the universe,
one always backs into the 'but where did that come from' wall.
we philosophers usually refer to this concept as an "infinite regress". A quick Google search of this term will lead ...
3
Sorry 'bout that. You should have the bonus on all your sites now.
3
No, we should not adopt a homework policy, and the close reasons list should stay as-is.
1
I did some poking around and I'm going to re-use The Workplace and Academia versions. I do like the links version, but for the purposes of testing and collecting statistics, I'd like to keep it the same. This is the sort of thing that could be promoted to other parts of the network or could be the basis for a new feature. It might be useful to add the link ...
1
It doesn't make sense to me to say "our experience of time is also a time". You'll have to explain that, start by defining "time". With regard to the question you link, it is unclear because you keep going back and forth with what you are suggesting (events don't arrive getting closer, but wait they do, don't they? etc.). Even if you were, the question is ...
1
If you have at least 20 pts reputation, you can post a message in chat starting with the @Username format, and it should appear in [Username]'s inbox. It will also be publicly visible to everyone. There is no way to send a private direct message.
1
TLDR: I wouldn't close the questions on the ground that it requires opinion-based answers, but because it aims to settle an open research question on Philosophy.SE.
The question is a legitimate research question about aesthetic judgements from the viewpoint of experimental philosophy. Since we don't preclude any philosophical discipline, and experimental ...
1
Bumping this thread.
I've been sorting through questions with the "terminology" tag.
Some seem to be a good fit. In other cases, it seems completely unnecessary and counterproductive as a tag.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible