15

[This reason is now available] Speculative Questions asking for the internal motivations of people, how specific individuals would behave in hypothetical situations or predictions for future events are off-topic, because answers would be based on speculation and their correctness could not be verified with sources available to the public. Example ...


11

[This reason is now available] Too opinionated a.k.a. "rant in disguise" The primary purpose of this question appears to be to promote or discredit a specific political cause, group or politician. It does not appear to be a good-faith effort to learn more about governments, policies and political processes as defined in the help center. Examples: Does ...


11

At this moment, I have neither voted to close nor downvoted the question. That said, the question has several problems. Reasons to close: This is pure history. This does not ask about politics but about historical documents. The question itself has a definite slant. Basically it spends most of the question telling us things. It's only at the very ...


11

Your answer was deleted and should remain deleted because the only thing it adds is supplementary information to an already existing answer. We know this because it begins as follows: It is interesting that the link (Wikipedia) to the so-called "Betsy Ross" flag at the accepted answer does not include the historical origin of the so-called "Betsy Ross" ...


11

I think your question has little bearing on today's politics. It doesn't even have bearing on contemporary politics (which is broader, +-1945 and onward). If you think your question is relevant you should indicate and explain that is the case in your question. As it is now, a reasonable person (myself included), cannot make the connection to politics today ...


11

A desire for revenge is not tolerated on this site, @guest271314. Instead of focusing oneself on hurting other users who voted to close posts, one should see if these posts can be improved. Other than this, Use the Force, Luke: A simple Stack Exchange API query returns a list of Closed Questions originated by a certain User. Further playing with the ...


10

I don't see this as an attack. In fact, I tend to see this as a course correction for the questioner. Because we're Politics, we have to be prepared for the skewed questions trying to masquerade as serious. As we've seen, people will gladly upvote and even defend bad faith things that fit their political view. We need something stronger than Please don't ...


9

I haven't read the question, but FWIW -9 downvotes (and counting), and zero upvotes, is a sign that the question isn't controversial at all. Only troll types of questions get that type of verdict. And just the very first line of the question is such a huge troll that it warrants a downvote and close vote then and there. Controversial questions get positive ...


8

I think these types of questions should be allowed, but we need to ensure that they are constructed in such a way as to rely on the fact that is available. Specifically, answers should be a discussion of existing Court precedent and free of speculation about how the Court might act in the future. I think both the edits that were made to this question ...


8

That is a good example of a "Rant in Disguise" question. In essence looks like a question that is not posted in good faith, and is intended to make some point(or in this case, I'd call it a "zinger" and not a "point") I usually close these questions as "Unclear what you're asking", because that's what replaced the old "not a real question" close reason, ...


8

If you make a genuine attempt to steelman an opposing side's argument in the premise of your question, it may make it seem less biased. It may also help you to dis-invest your ego from your political position and open your mind to learn from the perspectives you haven't considered.


8

Welcome to Politics Stack Exchange. We handle "Primarily Opinion-Based" very strictly here, maybe even stricter than on most other Stack Exchange sites. The reason is that we do not want to be a platform for ideas, opinions and political activism. Our idea of a politics Q&A site is a place where we can learn and teach how politics and political ...


7

Unfortunately, beta sites do not get custom migration targets. If you happen upon a question that you think would fare better on a different site, feel free to flag for moderation attention and ask for it to be migrated. Do keep in mind, though, that only high-quality off-topic questions should be migrated. If a question is on-topic on Politics, or if it's ...


7

I think such questions can serve a useful purpose. The intention is usually: [Thing] recently happened, and the media is making a big sensation out of it. Is [thing] really something special and extraordinary in the political landscape or is it just business as usual? An answer to such a question would help people to better understand political processes ...


7

I'd just let the 'roller coaster' do its thing because that seems to be entirely by design. There are certain time limits to the close votes so the roller coaster won't go on infinitely (at least not in the short term). All in all, it's not ideal that questions get closed and reopened repeatedly, but it's not the end of the world either. Fewer close votes ...


6

ChrisF's answer here is still correct: the system will Take the reason a moderator used to close (if applicable). Take the reason with the most votes. In the event of a tie, take the reason of the last vote cast out of those involved in the tie. So yes, it's a majority based decision; no reason has an innate precedence over the others; and the reputation ...


5

while the other question is considered perfectly valid and received a +48 score A +48 score does not mean a question is perfectly valid. A +48 score means that the question made it to the Hot Network Questions list. It would be more accurate to say that a +48 question is clickbait. The questions are not symmetric since there is widespread belief that ...


5

Allowable words One might guess that Philipp is white. As far as I know, he (gender inferred from name) is from Germany, which has a small minority population. He probably speaks English as a second language. It is quite possible that he is not familiar with the difference between the words (at least one of which can be offensive, so read behind the ...


5

I agree with JJJ's answer that this is more history than politics. That said, we do support some overlap, depending on the question and subject. Originally I was OK with this question - I didn't consider it a good question (no upvote), but it was about flags (which are political) so I didn't vote to close it or downvote it. But over the course of ...


5

Remove Unnecessary Information Questions closed as partisan often contain unnecessary background information. While this information is at time useful, including too much of it can focus away from your question and place it on the quality of your background info. Try editing out this information to focus attention where it should be - on the question. ...


5

I think that this designation is being used when the question is framed in a more rhetorical than inquisitive manner, not just for being partisan. If a question is framed with a host of not-necessarily-so assumptions that only lead to a single conclusion (sometimes followed by the OP posting their desired answer and then selecting it as best answer). We've ...


4

Theoretically, lack of research is a basic reason to downvote questions (see the hover-over text on the question's DV button), and should be liberally employed (political puns intended) to enforce higher quality and well researched questions. This is SE's intended mechanism, and works reasonably well on most objective-subject sites (with some major failures ...


4

I think this doesn't just apply to this particular close reason but to all close reasons. Never assume malice when incompetence is a proper explanation. When a user makes unconstructive contributions, then our goal should not be to drive them off the site. Our goal should be to teach them how to use the website in a more constructive manner. The ...


4

Let's review the revision list for a moment We start off with this as your question (emphasis mine) Have there been any safeguards or special rule changes within the DNC to prevent a rigged or unfair primary process as with what happened to Bernie Sanders in the last election cycle? This isn't a good faith question because you're asserting that the ...


4

I honestly think the question was fine. The controversy over that election was big enough news that it can hardly be considered a a fringe theory. You you didn't devote an unreasonable amount of the question to trying to convince us that it was unfair. Since the 2016 DNC controversy is the essence of your question, there really is no magic phrasing ...


3

This default reason was automatically disabled when we added the new close reasons. We were not aware that this would happen. I already re-added it as a 3rd custom close-reason. It just needs to be approved by another mod. Edit: It's back.


3

I take the current wording of the close reason as being for situations where someone posted a question which isn't actually intended to ask a question, but rather to express some political view. In that case, I think it's perfectly fair to say that it's not a question asked as a good-faith learning effort, but rather an attempt to abuse the Q/A system as a ...


3

Yes, these questions can be salvaged.The simple fix is "What are the arguments for why X is unconstitutional." If the Supreme Court or a lower court has ruled against those arguments, then that can be noted in the answers. If the issue has never been taken to court, then the arguments can be taken from advocacy groups. Either way, a definitive answer can be ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible