It’s not so much questions themselves that cause rifts and problems, but attitudes, or at least “perceived attitudes” among respondents that cause others to ridge. By that I mean responses that are dismissive of others’ opinions and feelings, or which tend to categorize others in ways that they feel to be hurtful.
Straw man arguments of all kinds, where a jelly’s argument gets misconstrued and cast into a totally unrepresentative simplification, and then that simplification is argued against, as if that was the original jelly’s position, causes untold pissing and moaning. Likewise, gross misrepresentations of others’ positions on sexual preference, religion, climate change, economics and politics cause major rifts.
Questions asked in good faith about even highly controversial topics do not generally, in and of themselves, cause problems. But it’s also hard for some jellies to ask a pointed question “in good faith”, since their biases are so clearly evident in the wording of the question – and their quick rejection of any opinions to the contrary – that those threads seem to just die from lack of participation.
Some questions, on the other hand, seem to generate a ton of sly and sometimes very broad ridicule: “Does he like me?” “What does it mean when she looks at me and then looks away?” “I dreamed of him; what does that mean?”