@msh210 - Can't think of any examples of a non-orthodox question with answers ignoring that aspect of it. The closest I can come is this question where it was pointed out (correctly, I think) that there really is no difference between orthodox and non-orthodox views on this particular topic.

But will post a link here if I find one.

@NeilFein Do you disagree with my analysis, though?

@msh210 - Yes, I do disagree. I'm certain nothing like this was intended, but there's an attitude there that orthodox certification is the only reliable sort. (Not sure what could be done abut this, it's fairly deeply entrenched in the site.) And there is the problem that, yes, the Orthodox do tend to be the majority who have these conversations. But I think this attitude is keeping reform and conservative Jews away from this site.

The only reason I'm still here is that I really like the Stack Exchange sites; if not for that, I probably wouldn't have stuck around.

I will grant that this attitude seems less pervasive than it did in the mi.yodeya days.

(And everyone I've spoken to here in chat has been friendly and supportive, and is concerned that I have these concerns.)

@NeilFein I'm very sorry if the attitude is keeping Reform and Conservative Jews away. But I have to say that (to my view) orthodox certification is the only reliable sort. That's the funny thing about the religion: it precludes religions, isms, etc. which are antithetical to it. In fact, most religions do the same. The Catholic Church maintains that the Catholic communion (Eucharist) is the only correct one, so Catholics are absolutely not allowed to take part in Protestant communion[cont'd]

[continued] , and die-hard communists maintain that communism is absolutely correct so forbid anyone on the commune from owning personal property. There's no "well, okay, I hold communism is correct, but you can join the commune even if you're a capitalist, and you can own some stuff". There's no "well, I hold only Catholic communion is communion, but you're welcome to claim to be Christian and nonetheless take Protestant communion". [cont'd]

[cont'd] Likewise, there's no "I maintain only traditional animal slaughter (or circumcision or whatever) is correct, but you're welcome to claim to practice Judaism and nonetheless do a different slaughter". No: you've gotta do orthodox slaughter. Now, I recognize that you're not going to, and the Church recognizes that not everyone who claims to be Christian or even Catholic will avoid Protestant communion, and die-hard communists know not everyone who claims to be communist will [cont'd]

[cont'd] practice community property. But that doesn't mean they condone it. And if someone posts a question on catholicism.stackexchange.com asking for the best way to take part in communion, I think it's very fair to assume he's asking for the best way to take part in Catholic communion. And if he asks explicitly for the best way to take part in Protestant communion, he can expect to get his question downvoted, and not to get very good answers. Not because [con'td]

[cont'd] his question is stupid and not because it's inapplicable to many people, and not -- mark this -- because it's not about Catholicism as practiced, wrongly, by many people! -- but simply because it's not about Catholicism as traditional proponents of Catholicism define the term. Orthodox Judaism views Reform and Conservative Judaism as lapsed orthodox Judaism, not a separate but equal branch or sect or denomination. So asking a question from the Reform perspective is like [cont'd]

Ah, I think I'm beating a dead horse now. I'll stop.

Actually, on second thought, I do have something to add: The above is true for me. And it's true for (most? all?) other orthodox Jews, which is most of J.SE's users. But it's not true for the site necessarily. That is, the site "is for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more", and it means it. And -- note -- I mean it, too. Don't let what I wrote above convince you that I think you shouldn't keep asking questions based in [cont'd]

[cont'd] unorthodox Judaism. Do! And the site's users will keep answering them if they can, and maybe one day there'll be enough unorthodox people "who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition" on the site to allow for a lively forum of such questions and answers. That will be lovely. (We'll need to start tagging things orthodox then :-) .) But don't expect orthodox Jews to view the premises of those questions as valid. They're not. (Again, in my view.)

Okay, I think I'm done, and I hope I've said what I've meant to say (not more or less). I hope to read your further views, @NeilFein.

@NeilFein , I endorse almost all of @msh210's thoughtful comments above. (See also my related ideas here.) The one thing I'd take exception to is "CYLOR." I do think that this phrase expresses needless attachment to the term "Orthodox": ...

... 1) Repeated use of the term "Orthodox" implies that there is an "Orthodox Movement" in the same way that there are Reform, etc. Movements. There's a large collection of groups that practice traditional Judaism, many of whom identify with the term "Orthodox," but some of whom have never heard of it. ...

... 2) Anyone whose personal Rabbi happens to be Orthodox will be consulting an Orthodox Rabbi. Anyone whose Rabbi happens to not be Orthodox will consult a non-Orthodox Rabbi, and inclusion of the 'O' in this acronym won't change that. ...

@NeilFein Did you make that image? Cute! Now I want to dress up as CYLOR 3000 next Purim.

@IsaacMoses Good points: I suppose I'll stop using it, too.

@msh210 I'm curious as to how you view the third answer I linked to here. The answerer has clearly misunderstood the question and therefore answered something totally irrelevant to the asker. It has until now just been left there collecting downvotes, whats your take on that?

@IsaacMoses for that matter, I don't like leaving people out. Whats your opinion?

@HodofHod The Lamed Vav thing? I'm inclined to not delete it. The answerer seems to be trying to answer the question, albeit bizarrely and unclearly. (I don't think it quite fits your "blue sky -> green grass" standard.) If,on top of being off the mark, there was anything objectionable or spammy in it or if it was very long, I'd be more inclined to delete. The flagging meta is an interesting and worthwhile discussion that I have to think about some more.

@IsaacMoses On second reading, he appears to be saying: "if you accept that they exist, then you must accept that they exist.

@HodofHod If I understand him right, he's saying that, given "the" definition (whatever that is) of the 36 tzadikim, they exist or else the world wouldn't. (That's like saying that, given the definition of zero as a number that, when you add it to any other number, you get the other number, zero must exist or else the world wouldn't.) It's an answer AFAICT. (A terrible one, and I downvoted it, but still an answer.)

@HodofHod ... plus a healthy dollop of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequences

@IsaacMoses I think it's plain old en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens : If the 36 didn't exist, we didn't: but we do, so they do.

@msh210 I disagree, but no matter. Just keep marking my flags "helpful" and I'll be happy. (I'll keep flagging things I think should be flagged, obviously not more than once, though).

@IsaacMoses @msh210 Did you read the article Robert Harvey linked to?

@HodofHod Ja.

@HodofHod I think I did when it came out. I may have declined some of your flags recently. If so, I apologize.

@IsaacMoses Wrote a response when it still said "tags". Did you decline those too?

/me declines nouns. Eretz, haaretz, artzi, artzo, artzah, artz'cha, artzech, artzenu, artz'chem, artz'chen, artzam, artzan, aratzos, haaratzos, artzosay, artzosav, artzosah, artzosecha, artzosech, artzosenu, artzosechem, artzosechen, artzosam, artzosan.

@HodofHod If you're talking about retagging, I retag others' tag choices routinely. If you're talking about tag wiki edits (thanks a lot for all that work, BTW), I think I only denied a few that were on tags that I had deleted or merged and were therefore no longer relevant.

@IsaacMoses Ok.

@msh210 What do you mean?

@HodofHod decline: To list the inflected forms of a noun, pronoun (and in some languages adjective) for case and number.

@msh210 N̮͇ó̴̼̼͖w͖̜̯̳̘ ̷̩̖̩͜I̡̛̱̖̺'̧̺͙̗̝̹͉͓͘m͔͔̺̗͎̝̬͕ ̴̭̯͘è̹͉̝̪̱͟v̻̥̜̦̤͢e̹̟̤͕n̪̱ ̲̦̣̯͙̪͚̕ḿ̸̙̤o̶̸̘̥r̳͕̥͖̥͈̕e̸͕̰͙͔̬͘ ̷̷̨̣c͇̥͎̞̳ͅͅo̲̜̝n̨͎f̨͔͙̣̼̞̼̫u̸͕̤̜̗̣͙̺͈͘s̛̪̳͔͉̩ͅͅé͈̩̩̥̪͡d̛̛̩̝

@HodofHod Never mind. It was merely a bad joke.

@HodofHod how did you do that?

and something is seriously wrong with the link parser

@msh210 I get that you were declining nouns, I don't get how it was nogeah.... Now if you had declined tags.......

Anyway, has anyone else noticed that there seem to be very few "Jewish Life" questions lately, and lots of "Jewish Learning" questions?

@HodofHod Do you mean Halacha vs. Agada? I think there's been plenty of the former.

@IsaacMoses I mean I see more questions like "whats the source for..." or "Is _____ allowed/forbidden", and less like "How long is a Jewish funeral", or "how to advise your barber".

@HodofHod Do you think the proportion has changed?

@IsaacMoses I don't know. I know that I occasionally see those questions pop to the top again, with an edit or new answer; but I rarely see a fresh one asked.

@IsaacMoses Perhaps I should suggest such a topic as the weekly challenge?

@HodofHod I think it's generally a low proportion. (Perhaps ironically, when I first created mi.yodeya, I saw such questions as the main point of the site, since it's not for getting pesak.)

@HodofHod Maybe something a little more specific, e.g. "practical issues that come up when keeping [Kosher / Shabbat / something else]," but yeah, sounds like it could be a particularly interesting challenge or set of challenges

@IsaacMoses btw, are you not supposed to earn reputation on meta?