Fill in a name even if he/she hasn't registered an account
Answer a question
Ask an interesting question
I mean, I could be wrong, but at least in my experience, this has always been the case on MO.
]]>Examples of this include: (1) the acceptability of the use of the axiom of choice; (2) the acceptability of proofs that rely on assuming that a computer has performed a certain computation correctly; (3) the debate over intuitionistic logic versus classical logic; (4) Hilbert's re-examination of Euclid's axioms and his discovery of unstated assumptions therein; (5) debates over the use of infinitesimals in calculus, culminating in Weierstrass's epsilons and deltas. There are of course many others.
Phrased this way, the question does not seem "argumentative and subjective," though one could still debate whether it belongs on MO. However, the problem was that the question was not phrased in quite this way. A "controversy" can arise in many different ways for many different reasons, so a question that just asks for controversies risks eliciting an amorphous grab-bag of examples that don't tell us very much. While I don't think I would vote to reopen even if I had enough rep to do so, I think the question, properly understood, is an excellent one.
]]>Perhaps a mod or the community can provide another reason for closing? In anticipation of this I am voting to reopen, though I do think the question should be closed.
Why bother? It's not like it was a good question. Also, it was asked by an unknown(google) with 1 rep. I don't think I owe any unknown(google) with 1 rep an explanation for why I voted to close (although for the record, I believe I voted to close it as "not a real question").
]]>