6

I think the current banner is too ineffectual, and should i) Be more strongly worded ii) Answers with the banner should be faded out (the same as highly downvoted answers) to highlight to other users that there are issues with the answer before they read it. iii) Anyone who (up)votes on a banner-marked answer should get a pop-up notification that they ...


5

Also, if I use the word love, like, by these word(s), I mainly mean: finding sexually attractive Then don't say "love". Say "find sexually attractive". Why introduce terminology that you redefine for your question when that terminology has a lot of other baggage attached? "Do women find the male chest sexually attractive?" ...


5

We don't verify the authority of people answering questions, so purported authority/education/experience of the poster are not valid reasons for voting. This is SE Biology, not a US court, and we very much value experience and expertise when they are directed into writing informed answers, but not so much degrees and titles (neither of which contribute to ...


4

If there are no scientific findings available that address the concern(s) of an OP, is it okay to then provide nothing but opinion based answers? I personally have no problem with people providing opinion-based answers. In this community, their quality is supposed to be judged by voting (there are inherent problems with this too, but that's the system). You ...


4

Regardless of your (or anyone's) own legitimacy or expertise, the internet doesn't know that about you (nor should users passing through necessarily believe that to be true about you -- there are plenty of "fake" experts out there). Having a more formal source of info allows users to check in on the legitimacy of something more completely & ...


3

Welcome to Meta. Personally, I think you have shown sufficient prior efforts, and from my point of view I think it contains a lot more background than many questions on this site. Further, cochlear mechanics is a hard topic and it took me quite a while to compile an answer. Especially because multiple theories are out there explaining the phenomenon of ...


3

Here's my current thoughts on this. I think it's wrong to be closing questions that have a reasonable chance of getting a quality answer. The responsibility of providing an answer which is factual, objective, and supported by evidence falls primarily to the user posting an answer, and secondarily to the wider community. Of course, the wording of some ...


2

So is the Primarily Opinion-Based vote to close only there to censor questions we do not like or are we willing to enforce it when the question clearly demonstrates that the answers generated are opinion-based, even if the question itself may warrant some thoughtful response? Closing a question as POB should be based only on the fact that there is no ...


1

In my opinion, I find this sentence, said by @theforestecologist, is the only helpful feedback for the OP: your question's premise (does somebody love something) is subjective and opinion-based The rest of the feedback the OP received only centers on this one. However, this important point is still unclear from the perspective of the OP. We have to respect ...


1

Feels like I have to take a chance at answering to this meta post! I will just go through your bullet points to address my opinion and my understanding of our rules. There is literally zero scientific evidence for their proposed "hypotheses". When we specifically refer to a claim as a hypothesis, it generally means that there is little to not evidence ...


1

Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unreferenced answers may not be reliable, and are often highlited because they present opinions as fact, make disputed claims, or contain information that may be incorrect, and should ...


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