-1

I was considering this question:

What did Jesus say about the end times?

Which is a question that is on par for Christianity.SE. The question is also easily researchable by either reading the bible or even <gasp> using google.

In a similar light, my question is down voted for not doing enough research:

https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/31389/bishops-have-no-free-will

Is the level of accepted research based on the specific user or do we have something solid to base it on?

  • I don't really see the comparison between the two questions. I agree the first question is borderline "bad." Your question, however, seems to draw an unfounded link between being self-willed and without free will. I suspect that's why it was downvoted. – Flimzy Aug 7 '14 at 13:25
  • I agree that the link is weak, I was just looking for an example. My premise is that the first question is a question that's easily answered with minimal research. At what point do we consider it a bad question, down vote and close it? That's really what this Meta question is about. – The Freemason Aug 7 '14 at 13:32
  • I think each question ought to be examined on its own. I think it is easy to make a case against the first one on its own merits. It is a weak question, but it only has 3 upvotes, so it seems to have been voted accordingly as well. – Flimzy Aug 7 '14 at 13:38
  • 7
    Downvoting and closing are different things, and should not be based on the same criteria. – Flimzy Aug 7 '14 at 13:38
  • Just a side note: the "bishops have no free will" question's premise was to show that a single word in the KJV that exists only in the KJV should not be taken as the final answer. It was to cause reflection on the Lucifer = Satan = devil questions that keep popping up. – The Freemason Aug 7 '14 at 13:45
  • 3
    @TheFreemason So you asked your question out of a lack of honesty? You had ulterior motives for asking it? Those motives being of a meta relation to the site? – 3961 Aug 7 '14 at 22:32
  • ^^^ These aren't rhetorical questions. Is that really what happened there? – 3961 Aug 8 '14 at 4:56
  • 1
    @fredsbend Sorry, I don't login to Christianity.SE everyday and didn't see this until now. The question is a real question from the perspective of someone who would consider the KJV authoritative and the only translation accepted. Now, questioning my honesty is a bit extreme here. While I admit that I intended (intend) to use this question as a basis for the logic behind Lucifer != Satan. Because in a similar regard, the word only exists in the KJV. – The Freemason Aug 11 '14 at 12:18
5

I'm sure this isn't going to go over well, but here goes.

Let's hit this from two angles. The first will be "is there an objective difference between the two questions?", and the second will be "Does who posted them factor into voting?".

Is there an objective difference between the two questions?

  • The first question is "bad" from a lack of original research, but it's answerable. There are actually recorded statements from Jesus Himself teaching about the end times. And for a beginner question, or someone not as familiar with Scripture as some of us, it's a fair question. Not great, not worth a dozen up-votes, but fair, and answerable.

  • The second one is asking "Do Bishops have free will". It's a question of interpretation, personal opinion, etc. It's unanswerable except by conjecture. It should have been closed, not just voted down.

Does who posted the question factor into voting?

There's a possibility that who is asking also played a role here.

  • The first example, basic as it was, stayed within the Truth guideline, something that's very difficult to do for a brand new visitor. I don't know what the odds are of that happening. I've only seen it a handful of times.
  • The second one was from someone who, as of this moment, has been a member for 349 days. And it's still a Truth question.

Whether it's here, or in the real world, getting it right and picking things up quickly is looked favorably upon. An experienced person making a mistake they should know better than to do, isn't.

I'm a fair example. I post some stupid stuff sometimes. I've had some pretty high-rated answers, but when I post a boneheaded one, there's no mercy. I get down-votes, comments, and sometimes invites to be scolded in chat. (And rightly so. I know better. When I mess up, I should be taken to task.)

People appear to have voted that way in this case, too.

  • 4
    I have no reservations voting based on "the user should know better." About a month or two ago, I downvoted Affable Geek's answer on something then told him in chat to delete it. He did, made it better, then undeleted. I then removed my downvote. That's how it's supposed to work. – 3961 Aug 8 '14 at 5:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .