Yes my friend. It's being overused definitely.

I haven’t read all this yet and to be honest I saw this post coming a week ago but a few things to consider 1) answers should not generally make a post not close worthy most people will only review based on the question as the system intends them too as we see no answers in review. 2) considering the usual volume of stuff in the reopen queue you were flooding it, that can sometimes play a part in things as people get fed up of seeing a POB HP Q, not saying it should but I’m sure it does. Lastly, there is some overlap between POB and unknown.

I haven’t read your comments yet but I will note I can remember seeing some that weren’t positive if even you thought it was answered in canon or if there was enough evidence to answer it. If the first voter doesn’t appear sure that will affect review.

I mean, you're right, but this seems to be a duplicate of the several previous metas you've linked to. Is the purpose of this meta essentially to highlight some specific questions for reopening under the general policy that "answer unknown doesn't mean POB"?

Honestly, I think that the main problem be that you're trying to reopen garbage and the community is resistant to that. It's great that you have a different take on what 'opinion based' looks like, but the correct way to address that is by seeking consensus on Meta and having the community reopen these questions rather than going on a one-man crusade to flood the queue.

@Valorum If there's already a policy that questions with unknown answers should be reopened, then hitting the reopen button seems a sensible first step on questions that have been mistakenly closed, before going to meta (as he has now done).

@Randal'Thor The point of this post is not to reopen specific questions. The point is that either I’ve seriously misunderstood the previous Metas (in which case someone can explain my errors) or the site policy is being ignored on a large scale (or perhaps I’ve misunderstood the sixteen examples).

@Valorum My understanding was that there already is a consensus on Meta (i.e. the linked posts).

@TheLethalCarrot I can appreciate that some people might have been fed up with lots of questions they don’t like coming into the queue. But I don’t think that frustration should play a part in a review. A question is either acceptable according to site policy or not acceptable according to site policy.

@TheLethalCarrot In fact, for most of them I do not have an answer. But the point is that me not having an answer doesn’t make the question opinion-based. There might be a real answer that I’m not aware of, or the answer is that there is not enough information to form a canonical answer.

@TheLethalCarrot You’re right, just links is not necessarily the clearest way of expressing a point (though I think there were only two that were just links.) However, if a question is in the reopen queue without any edits (i.e. because of a reopen vote) and there is a new comment with a bunch of Meta links, it would seem to be a fair assumption that those links are related to the reopen vote (especially if you know that this is the tenth question in a row that the same user is trying to reopen.)

@Alex - I can understand your frustration but it seems to me that you've gone about this ass backwards. Surely it would have been better, after the first couple of questions were refused reopening, to raised a meta question to try to seek some clarity about why these questions were still closed (and perhaps provide a list of others you thought might fit the same bill) rather than trying to get them reopened all at once then complaining when they didn't.

@Valorum After the first few times I didn't expect the questions to get reopened. The point of continuing was to amass a substantial sample size precisely so that it wouldn't be a Meta discussion about one or two individual posts, but about whether there is a widespread issue.

@Valorum I voted to reopen the questions because they failed (in my opinion) the criteria to be closed. You asked me earlier why I continued to try reopening them which appeared to not be working instead of posting to Meta right away. The answer to that is that if I had posted to Meta right away it would have been a discussion about one or two posts; they might have gotten reopened or they might have not. Either way the underlying issue wouldn't be addressed. By continuing through the whole list, I was able to write a post demonstrating the underlying issue.

@Valorum: Close votes aren't super-downvotes (wait a minute... you should know that by now!).

@Kevin - I refuse to apologise for voting to delete crap questions that are off-topic. The goal here seems to be to keep as much of the crap open, so that it can attract low quality opinion-based answers that stink up the site and make us look like Quora or Yahoo Answers.

@Valorum: Whether they are off-topic or not, you need to focus on topicality specifically, and not on quality. Otherwise, you come across as a rule-breaker trying to manipulate the content of the site to suit your own personal preferences. (Note: I am not disagreeing with you about topicality. I'm just trying to help you stop losing the argument.)