Not to be a ninny about it… but Fluther already explains the attributes of a good question a bit:
- Be specific: How deep should I plant my summer squash?
– Add depth: I have a small garden in Northern Vermont, and my summer squash have never grown well. What should I do?
– Use tags: Vermont, cooking, horticulture
Now, to me, there are implications to this example. Not everyone may agree, but my takeaway is:
- Q’s should be about real things. That is, not purely theoretical horseplay… like If offered, would you choose to be spectacularly beautiful? (no offense, Harp. I did indeed enjoy reading thru that.)
– Q’s should be answerable. That is, there should defensible positions to the rightness or wrongness of the suggested answers.
Now the squash example, if you get 3 farmers and ask them, they may very likely provide 3 different answers (at least in some of the details). So opinion in the answers is certainly acceptable and expected. But, for me, if opinion is going to come into play, I’d at least like some citation as to why. Drives me nutty to see an opinionated answer about a real thing provided with absolutely no context or citation as to its veracity.
—
P.S. The purely theoretical can indeed be fun… and I do not advocate banishing it. But it definitely flirts with the fringe between good and bad.
P.P.S. And like often suggested before, I find it perfectly acceptable to ignore the Q’s I don’t like. It just sucks when that happens more often than not.
P.P.P.S. Example of a Great Question: Why haven’t animals evolved with wheels?