We have at least one old unclosed question asking to evaluate some commercial online services: [Is Academia.edu useful?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/44632/7734)
This was cited in favour of questions going into the same direction: [Is Peer.us useful?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/106706/7734) The latter question in turn has attracted a controversial answer originating from the operators of that platform. Both questions have received close votes in the past.

I think it’s time for a general rule how to deal with such questions and thus I ask:

* Shall we allow all such questions, only some of them, or close them altogether? If only some, where do we draw the line?
* If we allow all or some of such questions, how shall we deal with opinionated answers and comments, i.e., answers not focussing on objective observations but mainly on bashing or praising the platform? In my experience, it is almost inevitable that such posts will happen, no matter how objective answers the question seeks.

(Note that I explicitly exclude services without commercial goals, such as the Arxiv.)