12

As a rule, the answer is "yes". "nonessential opinionated material" should not be in the posts. However, what one considers "nonessential opinionated material" is frequently subjective and in the eye of the be(er)holder. Orthogonally, a very good suggested policy is to comment on an answer, pointing out what you consider offensive bits, and explain why ...


8

Perhaps the rejection reason isn't 100% accurate, but it looks like you're trying to post a new answer. You can't, since the question is closed, but that is no reason to edit an existing answer and trying to put your words in the author's mouth. When you edit a post, there's this widget which says "clarify meaning without changing it". It is also ...


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 ...


8

I suggest that we hold questioners and answerers to a high standard of verifiable facts. Specifically, many questioners will make assertions about something (e.g. "Hillary Clinton is currently under investigation by the FBI") and we should require that they provide a citation from a reputable source. Likewise, any factual statements in answers need to be ...


4

Triage In StackOverflow, which has far more activity than this site and a constant influx of new, uneducated users ("I want a program that does X"), questions by users that are new to the site are not automatically sent to the question list, but put on a "triage" queue. This serves two purposes: If salvageable, the question usually gets a more "delicate" ...


4

First of all, you need to keep in mind that our community consists of people, and people don't always act consistently. With borderline questions it can often be a matter of luck which questions the community lets open and which it closes. Everyone's personal decision if they vote to close or not can be influenced by appearance of the question, current mood, ...


4

The problem with the question proposed, is that it was asking a different question than the way it was worded. In the United States, is there any significant "opposition" against Amnesty International? (for example) are there any significant political groups or pressure groups that denounce reports from Amnesty as "liberal bias"? Is the human rights group ...


4

Good answers, in general, are those that have lots of non-partisan facts and analyses, and are clear in their use of partisanship when stitching them into a coherent narrative. By and large, to the extent that fact-laden and coherent answers that actually deal with the asked question should (and I think are) be voted up. Questions need to elicit facts. If ...


3

I think in general practice this is the right approach, and would have helped out this question quite a bit, however, I am afraid that a blanket rule risks deflating the effectiveness of some questions that require an accurate description of one side's argument in order to be of value to the questioner. Questions of the sort "It is my understanding that ...


3

It may be the case that the question is soliciting a list, but Hillary Clinton definitely did have a reputation of being dishonest, and she had that reputation before the emails thing blew up, and before most of things that people like to point at nowadays to justify her reputation as being dishonest. Despite the OP's intent, I believe that a question ...


2

You proposed a huge edit to a question that's (at least for me) essentially a separate answer.


2

Asking Why a person did something is far more likely to be opinion based than asking what they did. What they did is asking about facts. You can even ask what they have said, but just because they said something does not make it true. But this site is about facts not opinions so while asking what they said is not asking about the truth of why they did ...


2

I would like to expand on Sam I am answer with many additional reminders: OPs should ask non-opinionated questions. This should be a must in first place, but is not always the case unfortunately. People and mods should be specially wary these days regarding tags like donald-trump, to even close crap questions. OPs should not ask futurology. They can ask ...


1

We need to treat low-quality Election-related content the same way we treat all low-quality content. We need to downvote it, and we need to be much more serious about that then we have been lately. 1. Downvote the crap Take this question for example. That is straight up not a serious question. 5 people voted to close this question, but there is only ...


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