user295: This follows my previous discussion. Some question express personal take on a matter and the response is agreeable when it is not exactly a Buddhist answer. The answers seem attractive to the poster of the question.

user-1: Upasaka Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena, well if one looks at which answers are marked at the best, one would see a lot of non-Dhamma-Vinaya answers marked as such.
But this is a "problem" of the origin of SE generally since it is somehow developed out of working aids. So if for example a code works for the questioner, he may mark it as the best answer.
When we come down to Dhamma-Vinaya, such a system does not work, since there are very less who would try it first if the answer works or even had the intent to find something that works.
One would even find Dhamma-Vinaya up-voted. "What does one expect?" is maybe the most releasing answer if not thinking generally of how useful it is to dwell among people with wrong view.  
Since it was just promoted on the right side of the frame here: How does one define a non-biased, citation-worthy study?
The Buddhas message is: Give it a prove and put it into action to see if it works or not or if you have actually gained liberation on the ways you are thinking.
And "Baiting Questions" would be not really bad, but actually good, if made with the right intent. Atma guesses that 90% or more questions the Buddha raised, have been baiting questions. How ever, Atma remembers that you don't like to have teaching questions, since people prefer to teach when answering questions.
If one takes your question here, it was actually a "Baiting Question" or? 
So also here: "Where do you like to go generally? Whats your aim generally?" 

295: <p>This follows my previous discussion. Some question express personal take on a matter and the response is agreeable when it is not exactly a Buddhist answer. The answers seem attractive to the poster of the question.</p>
 -1: <p>Upasaka Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena, well if one looks at which answers are marked at the best, one would see a lot of non-Dhamma-Vinaya answers marked as such.</p>

<p>But this is a "problem" of the origin of SE generally since it is somehow developed out of working aids. So if for example a code works for the questioner, he may mark it as the best answer.</p>

<p>When we come down to Dhamma-Vinaya, such a system does not work, since there are very less who would try it first if the answer works or even had the intent to find something that works.</p>

<p>One would even find Dhamma-Vinaya up-voted. "<a href="http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.080.than_en.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">What does one expect</a>?" is maybe the most releasing answer if not thinking generally of how useful it is to dwell among people with wrong view.  </p>

<p>Since it was just promoted on the right side of the frame here: <a href="https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63701/how-does-one-define-a-non-biased-citation-worthy-study">How does one define a non-biased, citation-worthy study?</a></p>

<p>The Buddhas message is: Give it a prove and put it into action to see if it works or not or if you have actually gained liberation on the ways you are thinking.</p>

<p>And "Baiting Questions" would be not really bad, but actually good, if made with the right intent. Atma guesses that 90% or more questions the Buddha raised, have been baiting questions. How ever, Atma remembers that you don't like to have teaching questions, since people prefer to teach when answering questions.</p>

<p>If one takes your question here, it was actually a "Baiting Question" or? </p>

<p>So also here: "Where do you like to go generally? Whats your aim generally?" </p>
