Why the bias against subjective questions? [duplicate]

Question

It seems more and more lately that people on this site dislike subjective questions, as opposed to ones about narrow, technical topics. I don't understand this. I see two reasons as to why subjective questions should be respected:

1. Understanding multiple points of view on a subject makes you more informed and allows for better decision making. I like to post subjective questions just to understand what the different arguments are. Yes, people argue, but a healthy debate is a good thing and attacking a point of view is not the same as attacking someone personally.

2. They're fun.

Given the above, why does the community seem to hate subjective questions more and more lately?

Answer 1

Several big reasons, most stemming from the fact that subjective questions are, by definition, subjective, which means any idiot with an opinion can contribute. This leads to the following issues:

• Because they are popular, they gather a lot of votes, and those that post them are often viewed as rep whores, even when it's community wiki'd.
• Because they are popular they are always (seemingly) on front page, which irritates people - they don't want to see the same, "What if compilers had feelings" question every time they visit SO for a week.
• Because they are easy to think of and post, and due to their longevity on the front page, if we let too many stay open then a significant number of questions on the front page are these silly subjective discussions.
• StackOverflow is not a discussion forum - it's a place where you get answers to questions. Discussion may lead to an answer, but it isn't generally an answer in and of itself. If you must discuss technical topics at length, there are other forums where such discussion is welcome. StackOverflow is not this forum.
• Programmers like everything to be in their proper places, and if the problem they are looking at is not black and white, they try to convert it into one that is black and white. While discussion is stimulating, and while some subjective questions have solutions, but everyone thinks a different solution is better than everyone else's solution, the reality is that there's no one best measurably and objectively right answer for a subjective question. And it irritates people, sometimes to the point of starting arguments and flame wars.

The site is designed to exclude such discussions. We let a very few through because, hey, we're not robots, but we all so very much want to be.

Answer 2

The ones that really are interesting and/or fun usually fare well, the problem is that there are lots of stupid/flamebait/boring/redundant ones popping up lately and the tolerance level for them has dropped as a result.

Answer 3

I think some questions are closed as subjective too quickly - the questionner should be given a chance to provide more details.

Debates like "Is C# better than Java?" are actually not subjective in the literal dictionary sense. There actually may be an objective answer, but it will be different depending on who is asking the question. Usually it depends on the project you are working on, and the people. To quote Joel, who as usual said it well:

How do you decide between C# and Java? The only real difference is which one you know better. If you have a serious Java guru on your team who has build several large systems successfully with Java, you're going to be a hell of a lot more successful with Java than with C#, not because Java is a better language (it's not, but the differences are too minor to matter) but because he knows it better. Etc.

Anyone willing to give a definite answer (rather than "it depends, tell us more details") is probably argumentative and IMHO inexperienced. Those answers should be downvoted. But the questionners might be genuinely seeking guidance, and should often be given a chance to provide more background details before the questions are closed.

Answer 4

SO and similar sites are structurally unsuited for discussions. They promote self-contained answers that can float up or down the order depending on votes and acceptance. The only way you can effectively reply to somebody is in comments.

For discussions, a threaded model like Slashdot's is much better. It's not as good for getting good answers, unless you want to come back later and read only the highest-rated comments, because they tend to get buried in the other stuff.

Some subjective questions can work well in the SO format, such as the question about your biggest screwup. That provoked individual responses that didn't refer to each other. Something like "Which is better, X or Y?" not only provokes flame wars but is best handled in discussion form to hammer out misunderstandings. ("X has flux capacitors." "Yes, but Y can handle them with three extra lines like this.")

And, of course, flame wars are unproductive on any forum. Objective questions tend not to promote flame wars, since most of us are fairly rational, and are convinced by evidence. Subjective questions often do. After all, if I really like vim is better than emacs, and have no good arguments for its superiority, I might well make bad ones.

Answer 5

In general subjective questions are upvoted more than others

This is due to the bike shed effect

People get pissed off cause someone seems to put in a small amount of effort (eg. "Is Python better than Ruby?", "Why does C++ suck?" and so on) and seems to get a reputation gold mine.

Hence the hostility.

Answer 6

Clearly, a lot of words could be -- and have been -- written on this topic. But at heart, the issue seems to be:

SOFU's creators consciously chose to create a community just for objective questions, and there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing inherently wrong with subjective questions, either; they're simply not the intended purpose of SOFU.

When people try to put subjective questions in a place that is marked "This area is not for subjective questions," chaos ensues.