I'm not talking about opinion-based questions, but the flipside of when a question could generate good subjective answers, but doesn't.
This question does have several parts that are tied together:
- What criteria is there for determining an answer is opinion-based bad subjective?
- What do we do with those answers when the community upvotes them?
- Should we have a harder line for those types of answers in order to stay within our good subjective requirements?
- Will this help keep those types of questions open or will it drive away users?
It seems that we have a very broad and unclear process in that context. I can't figure out when we decide to close and when we don't. It's clear when an answer isn't supported by good subjective, but it doesn't stop the community from upvoting the good idea generation (or bad), and there are times when questions are closed and others when they are not.
Here are some examples:
Cases where questions remained open even with a large number of bad subjective opinion-based answers
What is the purpose of easy combat scenarios that don't need resource expenditure? - I asked this one and didn't put in the caveat about good subjective. Many answers did come in with experience, but many did not and this question stayed open.
How to design and run cinematic combats that move between zones? - ANother example where some are experienced by answers and others are not. But many many are not, and this was allowed to stay open and is effectively idea generation.
Are there any magical contraceptive birth control options available? - Another case where the vast majority of answers aren't experience-based. Question is remains open.
A Meta about when a question was closed due to a large number of bad subjective opinion-based answers
This meta covers the other side of this where we say we want to close questions when this occurs.
It very much seems like we don't have a process of determining when to close when not to close. I get that we don't want opinion-based answers without experience, but we do seem to allow them a lot which suggest that we do kinda want it (which is fine!) - but it leaves a weird taste in my mouth not knowing when to act and when not to.
Non-experience based idea generation
I think the problem is that many people like the ideas that get generated, even without experience to back them up (they can still be good ideas.) But if we, as a site, are saying that we don't want those answer then we need to decide if that's really true or not and draw a hard line. Currently, the line seems very weak and...opinion-based on when/if we will do something when those answers come up.
The case for the hard line
If we are serious about not wanting bad subjective answers, we need to have a harder line and start flagging those answers for removal.
This is the extreme case of saving the community from itself. If the community upvotes bad subjective answers, then the cycle will always repeat. The only way to end the cycle and promote good subjective is to show that bad subjective isn't something we will tolerate.
The case for a softer line
The problem with the hard line is it's not very nice in appearance and we may lose members because of it. That worries me, because the community does seem to like those answers and I'm not sure what the ultimate effect may be.