Re:I stopped contributing to stackoverflow, but it's not dec...
by deong on Monday September 26, 2016 @10:27AM
(#12582056)
The historical significance thing is particularly annoying. It's an explicit statement of "We want this type of content, but the system of rules that we created and can change any time we like does not allow this type of content, and what do you mean, 'that seems like something we should do something about'?"
Re:I stopped contributing to stackoverflow, but it's not dec...
by d0mine on Monday September 26, 2016 @10:18AM
(#12581971)
"how to do X" has an objective answer: "here's how". Whether it is "the best" is subjective. That is why multiple answers are allowed on Stack Overflow (instead of a single article as on Wikipedia modulo different languages).
The accepted tick on the answer says that "here's how" might have worked for the question author.
The most upvoted/popular answer works as a rule (there are exceptions). Popularity contest is not the best way to get the truth on a technical subject but it works more often than not (you can read the answer in the chronological order if you like).
Plus some of the best, most interesting questions on there are "community wikis" which often tell you they should have been flagged as opinion based but are preserved for historical significance.
Because of that I really don't see the point in being so dogmatic about closing opinion based questions. Even something like "emacs or vim" I can imaging being a useful question, with a highly upvoted, thought provoking answer arguing each side.