There are overt troll questions that range from absurd to offensive and should be closed, and then there are controversial questions (eg paleo-critical) that also are closed but perhaps shouldn't be.
I think particularly for paleo-critical questions more of an effort should be made to answer them instead of rushing to close otherwise this community risks being characterised as dogmatic and insular.
An example of a recently closed question (now re-opened) that I would argue was prematurely closed: Why cant Humans Evolve to eat Grains?
Do you think the closing of questions is often too rushed?
Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly
I posted a question about how others got through early labor (0-4 cm before you go to the hospital) and it was closed down because I needed to be "focusing on my baby."
I was home for another 30 hours after that before I was progressed enough to go to the hospital. And for what it's worth, some people here saw my post and emailed me some great resources that really helped me through my incredibly slow labor.
I thought it was quite silly to assume that you have to go in a cave and not communicate during early labor. Then again, it was a man who closed the question... so he probably honestly just didn't know any better.
Quit Micro-editing posts just to get them at the top. It's incredibly transparent and against the spirit of this website.
Yes. Lets talk about this. The community voted to close 3 of FIVE questions Harry posted about how deadly bacon was for our health. All 5 questions were duplicates.
Now, for those of us who voted to close, he follows us around -1 all of our comments and voting to close questions, every question, no matter how obviously Paleo it is.
I'm sorry Harry but questions about Blow Jobs and fetishes (like your anti-bacon fetish) are gonna get closed.
I see no reason why the "Why cant Humans Evolve to eat Grains?" question was closed. The reason stated was "Not a real question", but it seemed people didn't like it because it was paleo critical.
It's typical of these types of sites: group think takes over, and little hitlers who have risen to their position by whoring on that get all the power. They are in the right because there's no accountability, or need to justify their actions. The laughable "reasons" given don't count - "not a real question" as a close reason stinks, when half the questions on the site aren't questions but remain open.
I just don't get involved in the bs politics here or elsewhere so it doesn't impact my blood pressure. There's a saying that university politics are so brutal because there's so little at stake. I think that also applies to internet sites.
I think there is a book about baking with semen. I also think it is legit...
I've seen a few (and I mean a few and I have been here for a while) that I would have liked to stay open. The last one was a spirituality question that would have probably generated some arguments, but it would have been nice to see what more people would say. Further in the past I've seen stuff closed because someone felt the questioner needed to see a doctor. I think 'see a doctor' is a legit thing to say, but not a reason to shut down conversation.
I am, however going to pay more attention in future. It appears I can vote to close, and if what LikesLardinMayo says is true, I will happily vote to close such annoyances.