I recently asked this question (10K only. Screenshot for others.) which has gotten a lot of negative feedback, mostly due to it's statistical nature. I have deleted it as the downvotes seem to answer my question, so I'm not sure if the link will break.
However, the fact that the question is crafted out of a limited sample should be irrelevant. If a user comes here to ask a question based on their experiences, then it should not matter that the probability of it happening to them would be.
For example, if a user always got a critical hit on every 5th attack then they might assume that's how the game works. If they ask a question based off of that, it should not be considered a bad question because of an assumption from statistically improbable observations.
The user notices something from their limited sample and draws a hypothesis. They then ask on that hypothesis. The answer can easily be that they were extremely (un)lucky, but the statistics of it happening should not factor into how good/bad a question is. While most of these types of questions can be solved through a quick search, some may not be as obvious.
So, what makes a statistical question like this a good question (given it has a +8 as of now means the community thinks it is good)? The only difference is that my question had personal observation and the other one does not include it.