user99: The question https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2645/im-looking-for-a-list-of-humorous-anime-similar-to-oruchuban-ebichu led to a debate on the correct interpretion of our policy on list questions. To avoid taking that debate all over the place, I opened this meta thread.
I copy the list questions policy below, along with my interpretation for this question, starting with the least controversial criteria.

The list items can be determined objectively. Don't ask about a list of our favorite things, or things we think are "good".  

The list can be determined objectively, but we only need to be clear on what we want to determine. Specifically, we need to get more clarity on what "anime that is similar in humor" part of the question means.

The list isn't prone to rapid change. If the list is hard to maintain, it won't be, thus losing its usefulness.

If/when we figure out the reasonable scope for humor, the list won't change rapidly.

The list is reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire wiki-page listing your answer, the question is not reasonably scoped.

The list would be reasonably scoped once we resolve the ambiguity about the "anime that is similar in humor" part as mentioned above.

It is specific and to the point. Don't ask about list of abstract concepts or anime series featuring some theme.

With the way the question is currently worded, this seems the hardest to meet, because it asks for abstract concepts. 
This is my interpretation of what needs to be resolved to reopen this question.
Edit
A number of contrasting responses, but I think we overall agree that:
Either the list questions should be disallowed altogether, or the rule needs to be refined so that it can be applied objectively. 
Let us discuss this further in chat. 

user27: I honestly don't think there's much room for discussion here. What's funny to me isn't funny to you. Humor and humor types cannot be determined objectively (such as, what anime contain zombies?, for example). 
Therefore, it fails at your first listed criterion. We can't, and definitely won't, define the term "humor". 

user24: I think a case can be made that this question could be made to fit our current rules. However, I think that's not because the question is good, but our current rules are bad. There's no reasonable way to make this question objective and reasonably scoped simultaneously.
I'm mostly opposed to our previous agreement on list questions, at least as a be-all and end-all policy. If we all agreed on what it meant and applied it uniformly, then it would be an okay policy. But we still have high-rep users debating over the policy even though it's been in place for almost a month. I have my own interpretation for what it means, but there's no reason it should be the same as anyone else's interpretation. If I posted a question that I thought was perfectly allowable and others didn't, it would lead to some debate. I'd be okay in the end, but for a new user, they can easily get hurt feelings over these kinds of things and leave the site. Even when we agree that we're properly applying this policy, the OP probably doesn't, and there's lots of room for confusion and hurt feelings.
What we need is a simple policy that can be understood by everyone and clearly applied. The current policy on list questions allows some good questions, but it becomes a point of debate whenever we have anything controversial. Almost all of these controversial questions are asking for lists of anime/manga, and almost all questions asking for lists of anime is controversial. Hence, seeing no better alternative, I propose the following policy change: 

Questions asking for lists out-of-universe, e.g. lists of anime, manga, etc. are banned. This includes questions asking for examples of a particular genre/theme/trope.

This is the policy on Scifi and they don't seem to have problems with it. I think in-universe list questions are a different animal, and our current policy seems to be serving them well.
This is very simple to apply, though there are a few cases that you have to be careful. For instance, Has an anime ever come out before the manga was published? is not a list question, even though the answers contain lists of anime. It's merely asking if it's possible to have an anime before a manga, and so it's a question about anime production. It would be possible for someone to come up with a totally theoretical answer to the question addressing all of the issues associated with producing original anime, but without any examples. This question should maybe be protected to prevent further answers that just list examples, but it isn't a list question so it should be left open. That's just how the answerers chose to answer the question.
Contrast that to the question we're looking at right now. There's no reasonable way to change the question into something that doesn't violate this policy. There isn't any minor modification that could be made to comply with this policy. So we would not allow that question. This policy would also affect some other older questions which were reopened after the original list question proposal.
It's worth looking at the questions which we'd be losing if we adopted this. After browsing the ones on the main site, none were questions that I'd be particularly upset to see go (feel free to comment if you think I've missed one). Most of them were either bad questions or tolerable questions that weren't interesting to very many people. The one that I'd be most upset about losing was the hypothetical question that I posed originally to show that there were good list questions:

What are all the anime films that were directed by Hayao Miyazaki?

This is actually a red herring. It was not asked on the main site, and for good reason-the answer is trivial to find. It's already on Wikipedia, exactly as you'd expect it would be. This is true in general for most out-of-universe list questions. Those which are "good" questions tend to have answers which are easy to find and verify, to the point that no one would even ask here. Losing these hypothetical "good" questions which are actually trivial isn't something we should worry about, and it's certainly not worth conflicts with new users over confusing policy.
To be clear, I'm proposing this primarily to avoid future conflicts with new users. An unambiguous firm policy that can't be argued one way or the other is the best way to do this.

tl;dr These sorts of questions aren't very interesting, and they lead to debate even among high rep users. Rather than allowing them in certain complicated situations, we should ban them altogether to avoid conflicts of opinion and simplify the rules.

99: <p>The question <a href="https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2645/im-looking-for-a-list-of-humorous-anime-similar-to-oruchuban-ebichu">https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2645/im-looking-for-a-list-of-humorous-anime-similar-to-oruchuban-ebichu</a> led to a debate on the correct interpretion of <a href="https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/348/what-is-the-status-of-list-questions-on-this-site">our policy on list questions</a>. To avoid taking that debate all over the place, I opened this meta thread.</p>

<p>I copy the list questions policy below, along with my interpretation for this question, starting with the least controversial criteria.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The list items can be determined objectively. Don't ask about a list of our favorite things, or things we think are "good".  </p>
</blockquote>

<p>The list <em>can</em> be determined objectively, but we only need to be clear on <em>what</em> we want to determine. Specifically, we need to get more clarity on what "anime that is similar in humor" part of the question means.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The list isn't prone to rapid change. If the list is hard to maintain, it won't be, thus losing its usefulness.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>If/when we figure out the reasonable scope for humor, the list won't change rapidly.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The list is reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire wiki-page listing your answer, the question is not reasonably scoped.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The list would be reasonably scoped once we resolve the ambiguity about the "anime that is similar in humor" part as mentioned above.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>It is specific and to the point. Don't ask about list of abstract concepts or anime series featuring some theme.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>With the way the question is currently worded, this seems the hardest to meet, because it asks for abstract concepts. </p>

<p>This is my interpretation of what needs to be resolved to reopen this question.</p>

<p><strong>Edit</strong>
A number of contrasting responses, but I think we overall agree that:
Either the list questions should be disallowed altogether, or the rule needs to be refined so that it can be applied objectively. </p>

<p>Let us discuss this further in chat. </p>
 27: <p>I honestly don't think there's much room for discussion here. What's funny to me isn't funny to you. Humor and humor types cannot be determined objectively (such as, what anime contain zombies?, for example). </p>

<p>Therefore, it fails at your first listed criterion. We can't, and definitely won't, define the term "humor". </p>
 24: <p>I think a case can be made that this question could be made to fit our current rules. However, I think that's not because the question is good, but <strong>our current rules are bad</strong>. There's no reasonable way to make this question objective and reasonably scoped simultaneously.</p>

<p>I'm mostly opposed to our <a href="https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/348/what-is-the-status-of-list-questions-on-this-site">previous agreement on list questions</a>, at least as a be-all and end-all policy. If we all agreed on what it meant and applied it uniformly, then it would be an okay policy. But <strong>we still have high-rep users debating over the policy</strong> even though it's been in place for almost a month. I have my own interpretation for what it means, but there's no reason it should be the same as anyone else's interpretation. If I posted a question that I thought was perfectly allowable and others didn't, it would lead to some debate. I'd be okay in the end, but for a new user, they can easily get hurt feelings over these kinds of things and leave the site. <strong>Even when we agree that we're properly applying this policy, the OP probably doesn't, and there's lots of room for confusion and hurt feelings.</strong></p>

<p><strong>What we need is a simple policy that can be understood by everyone and clearly applied</strong>. The current policy on list questions allows some good questions, but it becomes a point of debate whenever we have anything controversial. Almost all of these controversial questions are asking for lists of anime/manga, and almost all questions asking for lists of anime is controversial. Hence, seeing no better alternative, I propose the following policy change: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>Questions asking for lists out-of-universe, e.g. lists of anime, manga, etc. are banned. This includes questions asking for examples of a particular genre/theme/trope.</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p><strong>This is the policy on <a href="https://scifi.stackexchange.com/faq">Scifi</a></strong> and they don't seem to have problems with it. I think in-universe list questions are a different animal, and our current policy seems to be serving them well.</p>

<p>This is very simple to apply, though there are a few cases that you have to be careful. For instance, <a href="https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/2351/24">Has an anime ever come out before the manga was published?</a> is not a list question, even though the answers contain lists of anime. It's merely asking if it's possible to have an anime before a manga, and so it's a question about anime production. It would be possible for someone to come up with a totally theoretical answer to the question addressing all of the issues associated with producing original anime, but without any examples. This question should maybe be protected to prevent further answers that just list examples, but it isn't a list question so it should be left open. That's just how the answerers chose to answer the question.</p>

<p>Contrast that to the question we're looking at right now. There's no reasonable way to change the question into something that doesn't violate this policy. There isn't any minor modification that could be made to comply with this policy. So we would not allow that question. This policy would also affect some other older questions which were reopened after the original list question proposal.</p>

<p>It's worth looking at the questions which we'd be losing if we adopted this. After browsing the ones on the main site, none were questions that I'd be particularly upset to see go (feel free to comment if you think I've missed one). Most of them were either bad questions or tolerable questions that weren't interesting to very many people. The one that I'd be most upset about losing was the hypothetical question that I posed originally to show that there were good list questions:</p>

<ul>
<li>What are all the anime films that were directed by Hayao Miyazaki?</li>
</ul>

<p>This is actually a red herring. It was not asked on the main site, and for good reason-the answer is trivial to find. It's already on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayao_Miyazaki#Filmography" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia</a>, exactly as you'd expect it would be. This is true in general for most out-of-universe list questions. Those which are "good" questions tend to have answers which are easy to find and verify, to the point that no one would even ask here. <strong>Losing these hypothetical "good" questions which are actually trivial isn't something we should worry about, and it's certainly not worth conflicts with new users over confusing policy.</strong></p>

<p>To be clear, I'm proposing this primarily to avoid future conflicts with new users. An unambiguous firm policy that can't be argued one way or the other is the best way to do this.</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>tl;dr These sorts of questions aren't very interesting, and they lead to debate even among high rep users. Rather than allowing them in certain complicated situations, we should ban them altogether to avoid conflicts of opinion and simplify the rules.</strong></p>
