Making Skeptics less strict or changing the name?

Question

I'm probably going to get bashed here yet again, but I hope for this site to get a little bit more open rather than changing its name.

I'll give few examples of what I mean that I quickly gathered over just few hours on the site:

• I don't think questions like this should be closed, even if they don't comply strictly with the scope of applying skepticism. To me, that's one good instance of a question that could just be turned into a CW and left as a list of answers as it was intended and as it would pass any other SEN site, such as ask different, had it been about "the cult of apple" or something. Cults is a skeptic subject.

• This is a question that did fit with minor modifications on meta. It could simply have been moved rather than closed. Again, too strict.

• And here's another question that could have been moved to meta, though it's perfectly fine to be closed as per the current site's motto it's also a very valid skeptic question to ask!

So, my hope, as usual, is for a broader site. But that's a tendency I have that goes against the (still) current flow of Stack Exchange Network of building strict audiences among family sites. While I think that SEN belief is changing, Skeptics is a clear instance in which I may be bluntly wrong and if that's so then I trust it should just be renamed to try preventing further confusion (from newcomers that is).

Answer 1

There are two main points you are making:

1. Whether questions about "resources" are on topic on main (documentaries, health-questions). We discussed this in this question, and the answers are clear. More in general, we have had extensive discussions about what is or isn't on topic.

   The answer, in short, is that we will only accept questions concerning a claim to debunk.

2. Whether list-type questions are allowed. In general they are frowned upon on the StackExchange network, but not strictly disallowed. See for example this question on meta.SO which discusses the difference between a good list question and a bad one. In particular, I believe you need to have a specific question with multiple answers, and not a multiple question.

   The Penn and Teller example is a multiple question: you are asking us to debunk many episodes at once. If you have any specific episode in mind, ask a question about that episode or claim.

More references for further reading:

• Should polls be maintained as Community Wiki questions, or should they be closed?
• Real Questions Have Answers
• Good Subjective, Bad Subjective