This question about spells that are on the ranger spell list and not on the druid one had some contention early on, but its voting has settled down now. Some were saying that it was easily researchable, while others were saying it was not and therefore valid.
Is this bounded list question acceptable in the Role-playing games stack exchange?
But that doesn't necessarily make them 'good' questions. But 'good' is also a very subjective thing.
For some, these may be akin to "read the book to me" as there is no expert analysis needed, just time spent to parse and list.
Folks can think "Hey, I like this, it's useful" and give it a +1.
Others may think "Hey, this person is just asking us to do the work for them" and give it a -1.
No one is right or wrong. It has nothing to do with how simple or how difficult the task is.
The key is just in whether or not it's a bounded list (and even that is a bit subjective), but ultimately you can ask bounded list questions here.
A bigger concern is that those lists may become out of date upon the publication of new materials that could add to it. And that's where it's frustrating because few of those answerers return and or/know to update their answer. And then you've got incorrect answers.
They key in making this on-topic is in defining your bounds sufficiently that it is not an endless list. That means asking for answers to contain all the options and specifying what options are available and what aren't.
Keeping it loose on either send will lead to unbounded or partial answers that have no differentiation.
The problem with bounded lists is that it is easy to just give a couple of examples and call it an answer. I do not agree with that. If you are going to answer a list question, the list should be complete. Otherwise would represent an incomplete answer and it becomes impossible to differentiate between multiple partial answers.
