Not trying to ruffle feathers, I am genuinely curious.

Usually when subjective answers are provided, a comment is posted to remind answerers of the "Good Subjective" rules.

Some questions, however, don't seem to get similar treatment, especially when they relate to discrimination or targeted behavior at the table (such as this question or this one).

Is there a reason that answers without tested results are treated differently in these types of questions than in others?

  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Feel free and post a comment to that effect. You have the power. \$\endgroup\$
    – mxyzplk
    Oct 29, 2018 at 23:51

1 Answer 1


These questions are still subject to Good Subjective.

Basically all questions and answers are either Objective or Subjective or a mix of both. And all Subjective stuff is expected to be Good Subjective, or else it's... you know... not good. All of that is true all the time for all questions and answers no matter what comments have or haven't been posted.

Comments get left when people either feel like leaving a reminder in advance (sometimes treated as noise and removed), or when there's been enough trouble and Bad Subjective answers already that a community member (usually a diamond moderator) feels the need to leave a reminder to help people stay in line.

But the comment there is just a reminder of what's already true, the absence of any such comment doesn't mean the expectations go away.

Consider that "No tresspassing" signs get put down where people seem like they might tresspass and need a firm reminder to not. But the absence of such a sign doesn't mean it's OK to tresspass, and tresspass laws are still a thing that apply even if there isn't a sign about it.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ In the specific cases mentioned but also in other similar questions, nearly all answers (including exceptionally highly rated answers) are cases of "Bad Subjective". They are suggestions of how to handle a situation with no documented or anecdotal evidence. The topics and answers are also potentially highly volatile since the situations are at worst targeted prejudice, or at best bullying. Obviously it is up to individual interpretation as to the number of bad answers, but these types of answers seem to be moderated differently and with a more relaxed hand provided they remain cordial. \$\endgroup\$ Oct 30, 2018 at 15:42
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I'd suggest replying to the "bad subjective" answers asking them to support the answer with evidence or experience - then flag the answer if the answerer doesn't have anything to support it with. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Oct 30, 2018 at 21:17
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Ehhh... your answer is great but I have doubts about your analogy. I'm pretty sure that in many jurisdictions, the presence or absence of posted "No Trespassing" signs does affect the legal situation (like what measures the property owner can take to remove/discourage people), which is why some signs say "POSTED" on them prominently. \$\endgroup\$ Oct 31, 2018 at 8:56
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @SirTechSpec You're not the first to have mentioned that either! I'm open to using a different analogy, but I'm not quite sure what. \$\endgroup\$ Oct 31, 2018 at 8:58
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ First thing that comes to my mind is those electronic signs they put by the side of the highway sometimes (often around holidays), telling people not to drink and drive. Drunk driving is illegal anytime, but like GS/BS warnings, the signs are put there when someone thinks people might be especially tempted to break the rules. \$\endgroup\$ Oct 31, 2018 at 9:03
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree with @Newbie12345, there is no evidence in many 'social' answers to prove that they are 'good subjective'. It seems that many are sensible, but there is no actual proof in the answers. The highlighted answers are just a few examples of an issue I have seen before on almost every question about handling social situations. I don't think this is a case of 'flag them yourself' because to me at least it seems that the community - and specifically the moderators who are quick to highlight similar things elsewhere - have accepted these as ok, otherwise many would have been flagged already. \$\endgroup\$
    – SeriousBri
    Nov 1, 2018 at 15:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SeriousBri I've cast downvotes on lots of those, and I'd prefer it if the community was more inclined to downvote them too. It's not something that gets resolved by downvoting or deleting, it gets resolved by community voting. \$\endgroup\$ Nov 1, 2018 at 16:01
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener I like SirTechSpec's analogy of the DOT ticker warnings, and I agree with you that community moderation is the whole point of the voting system. I think touchy subjects like discrimination bring voters out of the wood work due to their emotional nature. I would be interested to see how many of them are first time voters. It doesn't make their vote less valid, but people who vote regularly in theory are more likely to consider GS/BS when voting, so it skews the results. \$\endgroup\$ Nov 1, 2018 at 17:10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Newbie12345 As a general rule, controversial questions hit HNQ then amass tons of inexpert upvotes. Upvotes might indicate community acceptance, but don't mean it's representative of what the community here wants to see more of. I'm not a fan of this situation. (Very much related.) \$\endgroup\$ Nov 1, 2018 at 17:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .