While the reason was changed ("Not Constructive" isn't very descriptive and not easy to understand), the criteria for closing based on "Not Constructive" stayed around, we just split it into two close reasons that both have narrow-er focus:

1. Too broad - There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.

2. primarily opinion-based - Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.

These two close reasons capture the essence of what "Not Constructive" was meant to be, and are both much clearer to boot.

(Disclosure: I'm a diamond moderator on Stack Overflow: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/16587/george-stocker )

Expert opinion is useful; aka, constructive.

Primarily opinion-based questions are not welcome on Stack Exchange sites. By all means, use notconstructive.com for all of the subjective questions--and consequentially noisy answers--that your heart desires to read and ask.

> Primarily opinion-based questions are not welcome on Stack Exchange sites.

Yes, we know. Even the SE site created with such questions in mind was screwed over by Atwood's unilateral meddling.

You've mistaken disagreement for ignorance.

Well, if you disagree, then you're welcome to instead use notconstructive.com once it's up and running.

"Primarily Opinion Based" is the new "Not Constructive"

definitely a step in the right direction. it can seem heavy handed when a question is closed. giving clear reasons and rules why is good thing