Should we require that questions be requests for information, feedback or discussion rather than merely a platform to state one's own opinion on some topic?

@Dr_Lawrence the irony of this question is making me smile, but yes, I quite agree.

How would such a policy possibly be policed? It’s quite possible to argue that a question with a definite viewpoint is merely a platform for a discussion.

Absolutely. This is one of the reasons the site has gone to shit. It used used to be questions were actually questions. You know where we would help people solve problems.

What is your favorite Ice cream? Isn’t solving a problem. Or How do you feel about whatever?

Allowing this kind of shit has pretty much destroyed the site in my eyes. They might as well stop calling it a Q and A site and just call it a forum. They would totally drive away tons of traffic if they did want I want so I understand why they don’t. They have investors now.

@hawaii_jake Where someone sees a question as being rhetorical, they could flag it and see what the moderators suggest. They may ask the OP to reword the question.

@blah_blah As you are still a relative newbie here, how can you comment on what has “pretty much destroyed the site in my your eyes?”

@Dr_Lawrence
Pssst, i think he is a senior Jelly in disguise really.

I agree. A discussion question could be formatted like a debate topic: “Resolved, that…”; the OP being free to participate in the debate. Maybe only within the General section though.

@blah_blah The patient got a transfussion of AB.

When a question is clearly rhetorical in a manner that prevents discussion, the contrary answer cannot be given. Only the answer posed by the question (e.g., “I can’t kill a person without it being a violation of the law against killing a person, provided that I’m sane and it was premeditated and I don’t meet any other of the defenses or excuses that would be available under the law, right?” can only be answered “No, you can’t.”).

Asking a question that seems rhetorical only because it may clearly show a person’s bias one way or another will still generate discussion. If a contrary point can be stated, then the question generates discussion. The one truly rhetorical question I saw was quickly edited.

However, in order for the ideal forum you describe to exist, you have to assume that fluther isn’t already just a place for people to state their opinion and not account for any other discussion. Unfortunately, people’s responses to this thread asking whether people have had their opinions or belief changed by anything on fluther indicates that the opposite is closer to the truth. If the question allows for various viewpoint, but people are just going use an answer as a pretext to state an opinion, then under this logic those should be flagged to (which becomes unmanageable I think)...in essence, it turns what should be a discussion into a poll, and the outcome is exactly the same as the answers to “What’s your favorite flavor of ice cream?”

The existence of a light-hearted “What’s your favorite ice cream” doesn’t stop any discussion, though. However, it might make more sense if questions asking for answers of the poll-type were in a separate section to address your concerns. We can always work on the categories to make them clearer, and we should always be brainstorming on that front.
:

@Dr_Lawrence : It seems that even the question you’re asking here could be sent to the moderators as appearing rhetorical. You have an opinion and a belief about how Fulther should operate, and thus you asked this question. It seems that it might be viewed rhetorically.

Your response to this question is where you seem to have decided to ask this question. In that question, the OP has a viewpoint. I don’t believe that should be a valid reason to disqualify the question. It started a healthy debate, which I believe is what was intended, and it started that debate in the face of the stated opinion.

The key word in my question, merely, concerns whether a question is asked for the purpose of expressing an opinion. A fair-minded reader will recognize my goal of obtaining the answer of others, rather than merely providing an excuse for stating my opinion.

I think that beauty of Fluther is that you can ask any question practically any way you want… but you don’t have to answer any question that you either don’t like or aren’t interested in. That seems to me to be plenty enough rules.

I have to restate, @Dr_Lawrence , my question about policing. Whose standards are going to be used to decide which questions exist merely to state an opinion? That seems like a very difficult mountain to climb.

@Dr_Lawrence

I am with hawaii_jake on this one I think. I was on that linked thread, saw your response, and then this question, and so assumed myself that this was the question you were asking in response to that thread and your thoughts on it’s appropriateness.

I like to think I’m relatively fair-minded, but because I was witness to the entire chain, and so knew that you had an opinion that it shouldn’t be (“merely” also has some negative connotations, suggesting that we should be doing something more). You felt that the question was more of a statement of an opinion. It still allowed for discussion on different viewpoints. That seemed to motivate this thread, where you mention the “explicit” standards, and claim that the forum should be used as something other than for “crafting an [sic] disingenuous question as a pretext to do the same.”

The problem is that I think your phrasing clearly indicates that you think that such questions shouldn’t be allowed on the forum. This is without knowledge I believe of your former response in the thread. And with that knowledge, I can see it seems you’ve literally taken an assertion that you made and recrafted it into a question for others, and done so in a way hardly neutral in tone.

You have done exactly what you claim to be disingenuous. But it has sparked a discussion regardless. That’s why I hardly think that it’s disingenuous. I think it’s intellectually dishonest to think we can divorce our feelings from our writing so clearly that the diction and tone don’t indicate what we believe. Regardless of how we characterize the motivation behind such questions, it’s an assumption that isn’t really helpful if the goal is to talk about ideas as such, addressing the merit of the proposal or issue rather than the merit of the OP.

It seems we are going in circles here in an attempt to claim I asked a question only because I had an opinion.

Perhaps others feel that distinguishing the motive behind a rhetorical question is beyond our capacity and therefore any such question is as good as any question.

@Dr_Lawrence

Nope. I don’t think that anyone’s claiming that. I think that the sentiment is generally that even if the motive is clear, assuming one doesn’t and shouldn’t dictate how you answer it. If I think that theres a good chance I’m wrong on something, for instance, I sometimes phrase (or consider phrasing it) in a way where one side is almost obnoxiously privileged. Because there are clearly more answers, and I may be at the point where I’m forming an opinion, I want to see what the contrary arguments are. This may end up weighting the responses that way, but hasn’t ever excluded people from also agreeing with me.

Is this a tactic? Sure. Is it dishonest? Not completely, because I generally am at the point where I can’t see the other side, and may need a shot in the behind. But in any case, my motive doesn’t matter if it generates a flurry of answers. So I would argue that the motive or intent of the OP will not determine whether it creates a discussion, and therefore it is functionally equivalent to an answer with an unclear or neutral-appearing OP motive behind it.

I think an ironic result of removing such questions would be that people wouldn’t be able to post about anything contentious. If it’s regarding something hotly debatable, most people have an opinion or at least stake in the outcome. This results in bias. This generally will be clear in the question. If it’s not, and it’s sent to editing, people may just give up. If they don’t, are they forbidden to post about what they think? That would have to be the case, otherwise the debate is tainted again I think. That would lead to less contribution. I think in the end we’d mostly be left with the poll-type questions of before, or discussion topics that can’t possibly inflame an opinion.

I think that what you might be suggesting is separating out the hot-button debates from the neutral questions. I like the idea of having a poll category (but that’s my suggestion). Is there another way you think the concern could be addressed?

@Dr_Lawrence :: I’m johnpowell.. I have been around for abit.

Social/General.

Nuff said.

There is a fine line, to be sure, between stating an opinion while asking for input and just ranting. One is allowed, the other is not. We actually remove things all the time for being a rant, or better suited to a blog post than a Q & A site. That said, we don’t always see every question asked, and that’s why we rely so heavily on the flagging system.

@blah_blah We also regularly remove questions like “what’s your favorite_______”, if they don’t have enough supporting details to make a decent discussion of it. That said, see my last sentence above.

Flag ‘em, folks! Thank you. :)