Move along people, no new information to see here.
See this answer, found by Random.
I have an answer to your original question.
I am providing this here because your other questions are closed. If I understand your original question correctly, you were asking for a way to find "questions that have no upvoted answers with specific tags", i.e. there may be some answers, but any existing answers must have zero or less as their vote score. I see this an being very different from "zero answers" which is the effect of the advice you have been given from every other direction.
To get a list of "questions with no upvoted answers" for a specific tag do the following:
- From the main page, click "unanswered", then, from the available tags on the right hand side, click the tag you are interested in.
This has the disadvantage that you are only presented with around 20 tags to select from (although the list narrows as you pick more).
- On the "Unanswered" page, just below the "Ask a question" button there are 3 buttons titled "my tags", "newest" and "votes". Clicking "my tags" will show unanswered questions that are tagged with any of the tags that you have specified as interesting (see your home page, prefs tab to set your own interesting tags)
Finally, if you want to just specify any tag:
Does this answer your original query?
In providing this answer that as far as I can see has not been given before (either to the original question or in the cited "duplicates") I think that this demonstrates that the closure was not entirely valid as this answers differs from those given to the suggested dupes.
I considered posting this answer to one of the suggested dupes, but the dupes all seem to focus on the "answers:0" concept, whereas this is "no upvoted answers".
I would be happy to move this answer (minus this speechy bit) to the original question if someone would consider re-opening it. If I am correct and my answer really is new information to this collection of threads, I do happen to think the originals closure was slightly unjustified and I would hope that the moderator in question re-consider in light of this new answer (which clearly belongs with the original question and not here).
If I have misunderstood the original question, or have missed that this answer has been posted somewhere else, please accept my apologies. I'm just trying to ensure that this functionality is made known to someone who seems to require it.