-1
$\begingroup$

Apparently we have a tag <😱>, which has been used 8 times. Most recently today.

But aren't those questions opinion-based?

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.

What do you think the policy should be on those questions (and also what do you think about the tag)?

| |
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

My first reaction is to say that the tag really has no place on a site for factual answers. On the other hand, I’ve learned a lot of things from answers to hypothetical questions on here. But on the third hand (I’m a mutant) it does invite a lot of space-balloon type questions. I opine that occasionally a hypothetical question is okay if well-written, but they will have other tags according to what they’re about. We shouldn’t have a specific tag people can point at to say their space-balloon question is on topic.

| |
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

I say it's a good feature. According to my experience it is hard to ask abstract questions on thematical forums, since people tend to not adress the core of the question, but instead focus on irrevelant things. It's easier to give people a setting so they can quickly get an idea instead of wondering what the OP wants, however it may be mistaken for some science fiction insanity. The tag is therefore a cue to avoid misunderstanding, next to big disclaimers/caveats nobody seems to read anyways

Also, the tag is appropriate for questions demanding science-based answers, that can be only given on theoritical grounds since the idea is untested in reality, and that's distinct from opinion stating

$\endgroup$

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