Can we stop questioning the asker's intents in the comments?

Question

I've just recently tried to join in on a few questions on this site after having a pleasant experience on a few other Stack Exchange sites, and I'm noticing an unpleasant reaction to questions that are still on-topic and answerable, including one of my own.

For example, I asked this question a while back to identify a character from Megaman X5's opening stage. The first and only comment back was the following:

What makes you think there's any lore at all behind it? The Mega Man games are not known for their deep story and motivation.

I maintain this was false and voiced my objection in the comments, but I accept that this objection can be raised. Fair enough.

I've also seen this kind of behavior on other questions, some good questions and some bad. Over the last month I've seen objecting comments on the following:

Is there any reason why Crash has to destroy all those boxes?

Are we honestly trying to make sense of a platformer with barely a nod to story? Seriously?

What game is this symbol from?

How do you know it was from a game?

I dunno if this really hits our exception for gaming identification; you think you saw it in a game, but we have nothing but your memory to go off of.

@GGMG No, it's a screenshot from a video with an element the asker thinks is from a game. It...sorta meets our criteria, and sorta doesn't. As is, we're straying towards a much stricter interpretation than before

I kind of just take it as a given that if there's a question that bears even a slight chance of not being answerable, somebody will take to the comments and disparage the questioner for asking or cast doubt on the asker's intentions.

I feel these comments harm Arqade for several reasons:

1.) They aren't constructive.

The site already has several built-in methods to shut down a question if it's off topic or not up to snuff. Leaving a belligerent comment doesn't add anything to the question or the answer at best and creates an unnecessarily hostile environment for the asker at worst.

2.) They shut down potential answers

The ID question above functioned exactly how identification questions are supposed to work, even in their narrow scope. Somebody had a tangible element from a game that they recognized but couldn't be image searched, they posted the artifact, somebody else who recognized the artifact and gave the game it came from, and the answer was accepted. Bonus points for sparking an interesting exchange on why the image was on the shirt in the first place.

The comments on the question demanding how the asker could be positive that they really, truly recognized this image did nothing except get in the way of procuring a perfectly valid answer. Same for the other two questions, if they ever do receive valid answers.

3.) You're allowed to answer that there is no good answer to the question

These comments, cleaned up and made a little nicer, could be answers. Sometimes there is no lore explanation for this thing or that, or there's a strong reason to believe some image is not from a game. At which point they receive the proper corrections and discussion they deserve.

A comment of this form is the worst of both worlds. They assert an answer to the question but avoid all of the checks and balances to official answers and aren't preserved as they should be.

Answer 1

1.) They aren't constructive.

Most cases they are. That's what the comment section is for: trying to get more out of the OP is a good thing. In the case of "how do you even know it's from a game," there was someone who also commented that said that thought they saw it in a game, so we narrowed down closing reasons, which made the question on-topic.

2.) They shut down potential answers

No I think they shut down potential reasons to CLOSE the question. Like I said in my answer to number 1, if we can narrow down reasons to close the question, it also makes the question better IMO.

3.) You're allowed to answer that there is no good answer to the question

Eeehhhh, sure. I've rarely seen an answer of "No, you can't." have a ton of upvotes. I've even seen answers that say something like "No, but here are some alternatives" get downvoted because they suggested something completely different. Anything that doesn't specifically answer the question doesn't get accepted I find. Maybe you've had better experiences elsewhere, but I've not seen it here.

---

The comment section has always been a weird place for me in general. I've seen "funny" or "joke" comments get upvoted and left, and I've seen a ton of them get deleted. I've seen "stern" comments get both upvoted and flagged. I don't really have an answer for you in regards to what needs to be changed, but I can tell you that from what I've seen, 99% of comments here are helpful.

Answer 2

Alright. Let's address the elephant in the room. You're talking about me. Every single one of the comments you're using as a reference were from me. You seem to have a problem with me.

So let's get one thing straight: I am not attacking anyone. I am expressing my distaste for what I believe are low quality questions. I continue to maintain that each of the questions you are referencing are low quality. Incredibly so, in fact. The crux, however, is that they are popular.

That's why there's such controversy about these questions. Popularity is almost always in direct conflict with quality. Let's look at the first one, your Mega Man X question. This one, I most definitely am an expert; I've played them all, up to X7, and I'd like to think I've gotten everything in them. Your question, at its heart, it playing a game of poke the plot hole. I am willing to lay long odds that there is absolutely nothing about the statue in any of Mega Man X canon at all. The X series is not known for deep and coherent storytelling, but just enough to give you motivation for why you're doing what you do. Think too hard, and the whole thing just falls apart. But, its a lore question, and we accept those, no matter how outlandish the premise.

The second question is worse. It's a game design question, but it plays magic word syndrome in order to try to make it on-topic. It would have been closed instantly after asking, except for the beginning of the second paragraph: 'But is there any lore reason why the destruction of those boxes is important?' Lore is on-topic, no matter how bizarre the question. I could ask if there's an in-game reason why Crash is an orange lemur with pants; because it has the magic words, we accept it.

I ascribe to a higher standard when it comes to lore; I expect the asker to give us a link that leads them to believe there is more depth to the question than what's on the surface. That gives answered something to go off of that's not just random curiosity.

For the third question, game identification is a rather contentious topic at the best of times. Our exception is to identify games that you see in a movie, TV show, or other media. Nevertheless, askers have found ways to twist it to meet the letter while totally ignoring the spirit of the exception. This is one of those. The asker is watching a show, and sees something they think is from a game. There's nothing but their memory to go off of as a tenuous link to gaming. They got it right, but that's still not what our game identification is for. An artifact was provided, from a T-shirt, of all things. Its like I find a random symbol somewhere, take a picture of it, and ask about that, stating I think it came from a game. Does it meet the letter? Sure. Is it really what our exception is for? Not a chance. As is, we're migrating towards a more strict interpretation of game identification, so I suspect this problem is going to be solved soon.

Noe let's move on your reasoning for disallowing these types of comments:

1.) They aren't constructive.

They most certainly are. They express that there's a problem with a question. It generally pinpoints what the issue is, if it doesn't give a method of resolution. Most often because I don't believe there is a resolution to them. Personally, I don't believe they're worth keeping. But I generally don't vote to close them; not unless they're way over the line. You'll notice I didn't vote to close either of the still existing questions, although I defended the closure of the game id one. I voted to close the Crash one once the asker's action showed it was an end run around our game design question ban. It was then subsequently self deleted.

2.) They shut down potential answers

That's sorta the reason I'm doing it, along with spurring the asker to improve their question. I could just vote to close, yes, but I believe there could be something there that might be worth keeping, if the question gets some improvement. Popularity will also ensure there is yet more controversy if I do vote to close, and to be honest, I really dislike having to argue each and every case. So I leave them alone until I'm totally sure they're too problematic to allow answers.

3.) You're allowed to answer that there is no good answer to the question

This is what I adamantly disagree with. We want questions to attract quality answers. A question not having a good answer is a bad question. An answer that says there is no good answer is a rather crappy answer. And its pretty hard to prove a negative, which is yet another problem with the question. If its a bad question, close it. That's literally why we close questions; to prevent answers.

---

At the end of the day, I am a massive proponent of high quality content. I am extremely hostile to what I believe is low quality content. But here's the kicker: I am not attacking the user. Any user can ask any question, but that doesn't automatically mean its a worthwhile question. My comments are meant to point out issues, sometimes guide towards improvements, and generally make Arqade a high quality repository of gaming knowledge.