What are the criteria for a question in this website to be considered opinion-based, and is it somewhat consistenly applied?
Such criteria would be necessary for moderators for a topic like chess.
I feel like many questions are closed off unfairly as opinion-based whereas some clearly opnion-based quesitons are allowed. Is such decisions made to avoid useless disputes? (To me, this doesn't seem to be the case).
For example, the question "What are the general principles for playing hypermodern against hypermodern?" was marked as too opnion-based and it was re-opened later after asking a meta question (by the way, it is not the case that the edits redeemed the quesiton).
On the other hand, there are obvious opinion-based questions which are let on.
Examples: one, two, three, four, five
The above question listed below for quick reading (without links):
Why isn't Chess960 the standard?
Why are opening books so popular?
Why do people prefer different chess engine evaluations?
What are some good podcasts to listen to?
What do I do next?
I could list many more. Similar to the last one, there are some many questions encouraged in this community that basically ask for opinions and tips on how to improve in chess (more examples: one, two, three).