Ok, I'm fairly new to WorldBuilding SE and I'm having a ball taking a broad swath of questions and seeing if I can generate a logical answer consistent with the world. I do this because the mental exercise helps in my real-world job and also in my efforts to tell good stories in RPGs. I have noticed that some questions that have come up get put on hold very quickly, yet they seem, at least to me, to be focused, not totally opinion based, and with clear criteria. Of course the all powerful Murphy determines that I will be 2 sentences away from completing what I think is a solid answer to said question, when the system will no longer accept it. I have been reading some questions on the Meta trying to find out why, and I have not been able to figure out what the criteria for "too broad" and "Opinion based" really are. So far the answers I have come across read somewhat like the old story asking about porn, "I'll know it when I see it". This stood out with the second question about Megastructures:https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/71533/megacity-shapes-episode-2-anatomy?noredirect=1&lq=1
This didn't seem to be a very broad question. I can see how it might be broken out into two questions but I can also see how one answer could usefully be used to cover both questions if asked separately. Conversely, the Question about Flying Mounts: How to make a viable flying mount? is left open and had a lively discussion going on
I don't want to cast shade on the moderators for this, you have a REALLY tough job, but I really would like to know if there is some objective criteria being applied. The best on this I have seen was the "Condition A, Change B, Result X" type of logic, but this seems too narrow given the scope of what people (at least, me) come here for. People are telling stories, and need to make sure that the world isn't too ridiculous, so they ask questions. If the question gets put on hold 2 hours after the person posts, useful discussion gets killed.