user16651: Today we had a question that unleashed a torrent of opinion-based answers. If evolution is not about increased complexity, why does so much complexity evolve?
While a few of them were factually correct, only one answer, coming from an experienced user of the site was referenced. 
There have been two POB votes on it for most of the day, while other questions that have not received answers have been closed within that time. To me this means that even though the answers clearly demonstrated that the question yielded not only primarily, but almost exclusively, opinion-based answers, there was no consensus that the question should be closed.
So is the Primarily Opinion-Based vote to close only there to censor questions we do not like or are we willing to enforce it when the question clearly demonstrates that the answers generated are opinion-based, even if the question itself may warrant some thoughtful response? 
At present there are ten answers and only one has any references what-so-ever. The top rated answer has 29 upvotes and one downvotes and ignored the request to improve the answer with references.
I would like to understand how the site wants to proceed?

user5198: 
So is the Primarily Opinion-Based vote to close only there to censor questions we do not like or are we willing to enforce it when the question clearly demonstrates that the answers generated are opinion-based, even if the question itself may warrant some thoughtful response? 

Closing a question as POB should be based only on the fact that there is no scientific answer to a question. To close a question because the answers are POB is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. 
I'm not sure this answers your question well, but my belief is that POB is used too much. Science is a very broad subject, and many times "POB" is used instead of "we don't know the answer to this question." The problem with that is often, someone knows. They just haven't read the question or answered it.
When I first came here, I saw a lot of medical questions closed as POB. That's one of the reasons I almost always include a study or some decent reference(s) to support my answer. This is, after all, a science site.*
If you want to shut down POB answers, hit them with post notices, comments asking for sources, and, when appropriate, down votes. But don't close the question for the wrong reason.
*I admit I've been a bit more lax of late. But I have 189 answers here, and I bet 160 or more of them have references.

user1590: Here's my current thoughts on this. I think it's wrong to be closing questions that have a reasonable chance of getting a quality answer. The responsibility of providing an answer which is factual, objective,  and supported by evidence falls primarily to the user posting an answer, and secondarily to the wider community. Of course, the wording of some questions can be improved to make them less inviting to opionated answers.
I think we should be using the POB close vote when there is little/no chance of getting an answer that is objective/factual, not because there is a high chance of opinionated answers. 
There are two ways one can interpret the reasoning for closure: 
"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."
I would say can be interpretted as either 

Most answers will be just opinion pieces
All answers will be largely opinion with little/no factual evidence

I think the latter is what we should be using this closure vote for, otherwise we are potentially preventing perfectly good questions from being answered because they are the sort of question that attract opinionated users. E.g. "Is evolution real?" Can very much be answered in a factual objective way but, as we've seen before, will attract a large number of opionated posts. It is for the benefit of the scientific community to provide a valid answer to such questions. 
Questions that can only be answered with opinion are not suitable for the Q & A format, and have lesser value. For example, "Is Excel or R better for analysing my data from my experiment?" or "Which is the the best quantitative genetics book?" are only going to give opinionated answers (PS. the answers are R and Falconer and Mackay or R and Lynch and Walsh)
What this means though is we need to be commenting on, downvoting, flagging and deleting low quality opinionated answers. Happily though, this will really help maintain the high quality of answer posts on biology SE!

16651: <p>Today we had a question that unleashed a torrent of opinion-based answers. <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/q/42050/16651">If evolution is not about increased complexity, why does so much complexity evolve?</a></p>

<p>While a few of them were factually correct, only one answer, coming from an experienced user of the site was referenced. </p>

<p>There have been two POB votes on it for most of the day, while other questions that have not received answers have been closed within that time. To me this means that even though the answers clearly demonstrated that the question yielded not only primarily, but almost exclusively, opinion-based answers, there was no consensus that the question should be closed.</p>

<p>So is the Primarily Opinion-Based vote to close only there to censor questions we do not like or are we willing to enforce it when the question clearly demonstrates that the answers generated are opinion-based, even if the question itself may warrant some thoughtful response? </p>

<p>At present there are ten answers and only one has any references what-so-ever. The top rated answer has 29 upvotes and one downvotes and ignored the request to improve the answer with references.</p>

<p>I would like to understand how the site wants to proceed?</p>
 5198: <blockquote>
  <p>So is the Primarily Opinion-Based vote to close only there to censor questions we do not like or are we willing to enforce it when the question clearly demonstrates that the answers generated are opinion-based, even if the question itself may warrant some thoughtful response? </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Closing a question as POB should be based only on the fact that there is no scientific answer to a question. To close a question because the answers are POB is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. </p>

<p>I'm not sure this answers your question well, but my belief is that POB is used <em>too much</em>. Science is a very broad subject, and many times "POB" is used instead of "we don't know the answer to this question." The problem with that is often, <em>someone</em> knows. They just haven't read the question or answered it.</p>

<p>When I first came here, I saw a lot of medical questions closed as POB. That's one of the reasons I almost always include a study or <em>some</em> decent reference(s) to support my answer. This is, after all, a science site.*</p>

<p>If you want to shut down POB answers, hit them with post notices, comments asking for sources, and, when appropriate, down votes. But don't close the question for the wrong reason.</p>

<p>*<sub>I admit I've been a bit more lax of late. But I have 189 answers here, and I bet 160 or more of them have references.</sub></p>
 1590: <p>Here's my current thoughts on this. I think it's wrong to be closing questions that have a <em>reasonable</em> chance of getting a quality answer. The responsibility of providing an answer which is factual, objective,  and supported by evidence falls primarily to the user posting an answer, and secondarily to the wider community. Of course, the wording of some questions can be improved to make them less inviting to opionated answers.</p>

<p>I think we should be using the POB close vote <strong>when there is little/no chance of getting an answer that is objective/factual</strong>, not because there is a high chance of opinionated answers. </p>

<p>There are two ways one can interpret the reasoning for closure: </p>

<p>"Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but <em>answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions</em>, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise."</p>

<p>I would say can be interpretted as either </p>

<ul>
<li><p><em>Most answers</em> will be <em>just opinion</em> pieces</p></li>
<li><p><em>All answers</em> will be <em>largely opinion</em> with little/no factual evidence</p></li>
</ul>

<p>I think the latter is what we should be using this closure vote for, otherwise we are potentially preventing perfectly good questions from being answered because they are the sort of question that attract opinionated users. E.g. "Is evolution real?" Can very much be answered in a factual objective way but, as we've seen before, will attract a large number of opionated posts. It is for the benefit of the scientific community to provide a valid answer to such questions. </p>

<p>Questions that can only be answered with opinion are not suitable for the Q &amp; A format, and have lesser value. For example, "Is Excel or R better for analysing my data from my experiment?" or "Which is the the best quantitative genetics book?" are only going to give opinionated answers (PS. the answers are R and Falconer and Mackay or R and Lynch and Walsh)</p>

<p>What this means though is we need to be commenting on, downvoting, flagging and deleting low quality opinionated answers. Happily though, this will really help maintain the high quality of answer posts on biology SE!</p>
