user10844: I ask because I'm surprised, in fact disappointed, that this question was closed: How do I deal with idle chatter/people that talk a lot?
(I've retitled it as "How can I talk to my mother (who idle-chatters) without getting angry?")
The question is about dukkha, not the kind in the books, but in real life. It's about defilements, specifically anger towards the mother. It's asking for a way out this dukkha, to be free from the anger. Is this not Dhamma?
If Buddhism.SE does not allow such real-life Dhamma questions, please specify it.
(I've added "bug" as one of the tags because it's the only one among those I have to include that seems most appropriate. That the question was closed at all is a 'bug'.)

user-1: I think an expert in Buddhist doctrine can easily solve the real life issues and provide concrete references as demonstrable basis for the suggested strategies.
There is this dumb policy of compartmentalization of knowledge here on this site. Ie you can't use expression which overlaps with mathematics to explain Buddhism and apparently you can't ask for solutions to certain real-life problems.
It is as if Buddhism is seen as a mythical set of ideas to be entertained with next to  no applicability in real life and reality beyond sitting with one's eyes closed and trying to achieve some peace of mind.
As to the answer in particular we are a small community with few active posters who can vote to reopen questions, if this was a big site and proportional percentage of users voted to reopen a Q it would be easy to override a mod.

user254: Buddhism.SE is meant for real-life practical questions and not only for theoretical/scriptural questions.
Or as the Tour says ...

Buddhism Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people practicing or interested in Buddhist philosophy, teaching, and practice.

... though there are also a few questions about Buddhist art or iconography, and that kind of thing.
I think Andrei mentioned once he even personally prefers practical questions -- see this answer:

To me this site is supposed to be primarily about Buddhism (i.e. the teachings/narratives inside the Buddhist universe). I personally also encourage questions requesting to relate specific Buddhist narratives with personal practice.

I believe the question was closed for the reason given, i.e. not because the question was practical but perhaps because it didn't seem overtly Buddhist.
I posted this comment ...

It might be worth asking this question on the Interpersonal Skills site or even on the Parenting site?

... because I thought it might be on-topic on those sites -- and, because the question didn't mention Buddhism, the communities on those site might be able to answer the question skilfully or expertly (to help the OP).
I suppose Andrei took that a step further and closed it here.
If this question were reopened I'm not sure where you would draw a line, that a question must be "about Buddhism". Maybe it should be reopened. I realise that there is material in Buddhism (or "Buddhist narratives") about anger and speech and parents.
I think that normally in the past we've been permissive about questions but less permissive about answers -- if a question can be answered without the answer being based on Buddhism, even so it shouldn't be -- and if it is then that answer may be deleted (by a moderator). The argument is, "The question isn't explicitly Buddhist but by posting on this site it's implicitly asking for an answer based on Buddhism, so an answer that isn't based on Buddhism isn't on-topic".
(If the question were asked on other sites, any answers there wouldn't have that constraint.)
Moderators deleting answers can be kind of unwelcome too. Or an answer might be challenged -- "Explain how this answer is based on Buddhism, otherwise it will be deleted". An answer ought to be both, an answer to the question and based on Buddhism. If a question isn't explicitly about Buddhism then that may be more difficult.
Andrei's of the opinion that questions have an incline:

The fact that question can be answered well, does not mean it will be answered well. A good question has an incline, so its answers naturally turn out good.

I expect the question could be reopened if there were an extra hint of Buddhism in it -- if it were evident why the OP posted the question on this site.
Questions from new users are more difficult to answer, in that you have no clue about what they know already, "where they're coming from" (and this user is not only new but "unregistered" and didn't reply to comments etc.).
And it's difficult to edit someone else's question, you don't want to change the meaning of it, to make it ask something which they didn't intend to ask. But -- if you want to reopen this question, and without any further clarification from the OP, perhaps it would be a good edit to simply add your introduction as a new first paragraph to the question:

How can I talk to my mother (who idle-chatters) without getting angry?
The question is about dukkha, not the kind in the books, but in real life. It's about defilements, specifically anger towards the mother. It's asking for a way out this dukkha, to be free from the anger.
How do I deal with idle chatter/people that talk a lot? Specifically with my mother. I talk [etc.]


10844: <p>I ask because I'm surprised, in fact disappointed, that this question was closed: <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39570/how-do-i-deal-with-idle-chatter-people-that-talk-a-lot">How do I deal with idle chatter/people that talk a lot?</a>
(I've retitled it as &quot;How can I talk to my mother (who idle-chatters) without getting angry?&quot;)</p>
<p>The question is about dukkha, not the kind in the books, but in real life. It's about defilements, specifically anger towards the mother. It's asking for a way out this dukkha, to be free from the anger. Is this not Dhamma?</p>
<p>If Buddhism.SE does not allow such real-life Dhamma questions, please specify it.</p>
<p>(I've added &quot;bug&quot; as one of the tags because it's the only one among those I have to include that seems most appropriate. That the question was closed at all is a 'bug'.)</p>
 -1: <p>I think an expert in Buddhist doctrine can easily solve the real life issues and provide concrete references as demonstrable basis for the suggested strategies.</p>
<p>There is this dumb policy of compartmentalization of knowledge here on this site. Ie you can't use expression which overlaps with mathematics to explain Buddhism and apparently you can't ask for solutions to certain real-life problems.</p>
<p>It is as if Buddhism is seen as a mythical set of ideas to be entertained with next to  no applicability in real life and reality beyond sitting with one's eyes closed and trying to achieve some peace of mind.</p>
<p>As to the answer in particular we are a small community with few active posters who can vote to reopen questions, if this was a big site and proportional percentage of users voted to reopen a Q it would be easy to override a mod.</p>
 254: <p>Buddhism.SE is meant for real-life practical questions and not only for theoretical/scriptural questions.</p>
<p>Or as the Tour says ...</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Buddhism Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people practicing or interested in Buddhist philosophy, teaching, and practice.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>... though there are also a few questions about Buddhist art or iconography, and that kind of thing.</p>
<p>I think Andrei mentioned once he even personally prefers practical questions -- see <a href="https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1827/254">this answer</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To me this site is supposed to be primarily about Buddhism (i.e. the teachings/narratives inside the Buddhist universe). I personally also encourage questions requesting to relate specific Buddhist narratives with personal practice.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I believe the question was closed for the reason given, i.e. not because the question was practical but perhaps because it didn't seem overtly Buddhist.</p>
<p>I posted this comment ...</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It might be worth asking this question on the <a href="https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/">Interpersonal Skills</a> site or even on the <a href="https://parenting.stackexchange.com/">Parenting</a> site?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>... because I thought it might be on-topic on those sites -- and, because the question didn't mention Buddhism, the communities on those site might be able to answer the question skilfully or expertly (to help the OP).</p>
<p>I suppose Andrei took that a step further and closed it here.</p>
<p>If this question were reopened I'm not sure where you would draw a line, that a question must be &quot;about Buddhism&quot;. Maybe it should be reopened. I realise that there is material in Buddhism (or &quot;Buddhist narratives&quot;) about anger and speech and parents.</p>
<p>I think that normally in the past we've been permissive about questions but less permissive about answers -- if a question can be answered without the answer being based on Buddhism, even so it shouldn't be -- and if it is then that answer may be deleted (by a moderator). The argument is, &quot;The question isn't explicitly Buddhist but by posting on this site it's implicitly asking for an answer based on Buddhism, so an answer that isn't based on Buddhism isn't on-topic&quot;.</p>
<p>(If the question were asked on other sites, any answers there wouldn't have that constraint.)</p>
<p>Moderators deleting answers can be kind of unwelcome too. Or an answer might be challenged -- &quot;Explain how this answer is based on Buddhism, otherwise it will be deleted&quot;. An answer ought to be both, an answer to the question and based on Buddhism. If a question isn't explicitly about Buddhism then that may be more difficult.</p>
<p>Andrei's of the opinion that <a href="https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/393/which-type-of-buddhism-is-for-me#comment635_394">questions have an incline</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The fact that question can be answered well, does not mean it will be answered well. A good question has an incline, so its answers naturally turn out good.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I expect the question could be reopened if there were an extra hint of Buddhism in it -- if it were evident why the OP posted the question on this site.</p>
<p>Questions from new users are more difficult to answer, in that you have no clue about what they know already, &quot;where they're coming from&quot; (and this user is not only new but &quot;unregistered&quot; and didn't reply to comments etc.).</p>
<p>And it's difficult to edit someone else's question, you don't want to change the meaning of it, to make it ask something which they didn't intend to ask. But -- if you want to reopen this question, and without any further clarification from the OP, perhaps it would be a good edit to simply add your introduction as a new first paragraph to the question:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>How can I talk to my mother (who idle-chatters) without getting angry?</strong></p>
<p>The question is about dukkha, not the kind in the books, but in real life. It's about defilements, specifically anger towards the mother. It's asking for a way out this dukkha, to be free from the anger.</p>
<p>How do I deal with idle chatter/people that talk a lot? Specifically with my mother. I talk [etc.]</p>
</blockquote>
