user948: The question, uhh... in question:
If you only ate fruits, vegetables or smoothies would you be able to skip drinking water?
You can follow along by looking at its timeline. Some parts may only be viewable by high-rep users, I'm not sure.
So, getting on with it. The question was originally asked as a one-liner, and ended up accumulating 4 downvotes by the end of the day it was asked. I added my usual "What research have you done? Bio.SE works this way..." comment, but didn't downvote or cast a close vote because it was asked by an established user, and there was a decent chance they'd come back and edit it into shape. Others didn't feel that way, apparently, and it was closed by two regular users and a mod-hammer. OK, whatever, happens all the time.
However, in this case the asker came back and actually put a decent amount of previous research and critical thinking into the question. Their edit put the question into the Reopen queue, where it was voted to stay closed, one of the votes coming from the same mod who hammered it closed the first time, and the other by a user who had voted to close it in the first place. That vote from the mod seemed to hammer it again.
I revisited the question at some point after this, saw the revision, thought it added a lot of value, and nominated it for reopening, pushing it back into the Reopen queue. The same two people reviewed it and voted to remain closed again, with a mod hammer ending the discussion yet again.
A few questions and a short rant. Why was this post hammered three times by the same mod, even after substantial improvement? More broadly, why did only four people in total interact with it (including me), and why weren't any comments left besides mine, especially when it traveled the review queue twice and was hammered three times, by the same mod? What is so wrong with the edited post?
One takeaway from this is that we need many more people to get involved in close/reopen voting, and the review queues in general. That's a common plea around here, unfortunately, and I haven't heard (nor thought of myself) any good ways of doing that.
The second takeaway is that we need to have a full, serious discussion on the use of mod hammers in closing. Since I want discussion here to focus on this question and this particular set of circumstances, I will ask a second Meta question specifically about that, referencing this one.

user19855: What's wrong with the question is that smoothies can contain any proportion of water. All the research added (in edits) somehow failed to look up "smoothie" on Wikipedia:

A smoothie is a drink made from pureed raw fruit and/or vegetables, using a blender.[1] A smoothie often has a liquid base such as water, fruit juice, plant milk, and sometimes dairy products, such as milk, yogurt, ice cream or cottage cheese. Smoothies may be made using other ingredients, such as crushed ice, sweeteners (honey or sugar), vinegar, whey powder, chocolate or nutritional supplements, among others by personal choice.

Much of the "research" added by edits is random irrelevant stuff like Maslow's hierarchy of needs etc. Another quote was added that smoothies lack fiber... when the question is about water... Actually that quote does have the answer:

A smoothie, in contrast, may or may not be high in water, depending on how much fluid it contains.

But I guess the OP didn't notice it, with their bulk copypasta. Actually, OP's own conclusion from reading that quote was that

Fruits and veggies contain water but smoothies do not.

It's hard to say what may cause that level of failure in reading comprehension...
The original question was primary-school grade. The edited question was worse in terms of signal-to-noise ratio.
Anyhow, I tried to give it (an actual) biology angle by answering it with water contents of fruits and vegetables.

948: <p>The question, uhh... in question:</p>
<p><a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/98168/if-you-only-ate-fruits-vegetables-or-smoothies-would-you-be-able-to-skip-drinki">If you only ate fruits, vegetables or smoothies would you be able to skip drinking water?</a></p>
<p>You can follow along by looking at <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/posts/98168/timeline?filter=WithVoteSummaries">its timeline</a>. Some parts may only be viewable by high-rep users, I'm not sure.</p>
<p>So, getting on with it. The question was originally asked as a one-liner, and ended up accumulating 4 downvotes by the end of the day it was asked. I added my usual <em>&quot;What research have you done? Bio.SE works this way...&quot;</em> comment, but didn't downvote or cast a close vote because it was asked by an established user, and there was a decent chance they'd come back and edit it into shape. Others didn't feel that way, apparently, and it was closed by two regular users and a mod-hammer. OK, whatever, happens all the time.</p>
<p>However, in this case the asker came back and actually put a decent amount of previous research and critical thinking into the question. Their edit put the question into the <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/review/reopen/69162">Reopen queue</a>, where it was voted to stay closed, one of the votes coming from the same mod who hammered it closed the first time, and the other by a user who had voted to close it in the first place. That vote from the mod seemed to hammer it again.</p>
<p>I revisited the question at some point after this, saw the revision, thought it added a lot of value, and nominated it for reopening, pushing it back into the <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/review/reopen/69176">Reopen queue</a>. <em>The same two people</em> reviewed it and voted to remain closed <em>again</em>, with a mod hammer ending the discussion yet again.</p>
<p>A few questions and a short rant. Why was this post hammered three times by the same mod, even after substantial improvement? More broadly, why did only four people in total interact with it (including me), and why weren't any comments left besides mine, especially when it traveled the review queue twice and was hammered three times, <em>by the same mod</em>? What is so wrong with the edited post?</p>
<p>One takeaway from this is that we need many more people to get involved in close/reopen voting, and the review queues in general. That's a common plea around here, unfortunately, and I haven't heard (nor thought of myself) any good ways of doing that.</p>
<p>The second takeaway is that we need to have a full, serious discussion on the use of mod hammers in closing. Since I want discussion here to focus on this question and this particular set of circumstances, I will ask a second Meta question specifically about that, referencing this one.</p>
 19855: <p>What's wrong with the question is that smoothies can contain any proportion of water. All the research added (in edits) somehow failed to look up <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoothie" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;smoothie&quot; on Wikipedia</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A smoothie is a drink made from pureed raw fruit and/or vegetables, using a blender.[1] A smoothie often has a liquid base <strong>such as water</strong>, fruit juice, plant milk, and sometimes dairy products, such as milk, yogurt, ice cream or cottage cheese. Smoothies may be made using other ingredients, such as crushed ice, sweeteners (honey or sugar), vinegar, whey powder, chocolate or nutritional supplements, among others by personal choice.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Much of the &quot;research&quot; added by edits is random irrelevant stuff like Maslow's hierarchy of needs etc. Another quote was added that smoothies lack fiber... when the question is about water... Actually that quote does have the answer:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A smoothie, in contrast, may or may not be high in water, depending on how much fluid it contains.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But I guess the OP didn't notice it, with their bulk copypasta. Actually, OP's own conclusion from reading that quote was that</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Fruits and veggies contain water but smoothies do not.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It's hard to say what may cause that level of failure in reading comprehension...</p>
<p>The original question was primary-school grade. The edited question was worse in terms of signal-to-noise ratio.</p>
<p>Anyhow, I tried to give it (an actual) biology angle by answering it with water contents of fruits and vegetables.</p>
