Our approach to subjective programming questions

It always seemed to me that StackExchange's own http://programmers.stackexchange.com was intended for this very concept. From the FAQ:

What about subjective questions?

Subjective questions are allowed, but subjective does not mean “anything goes”. Please keep it professional at all times. If this is a question you'd be uncomfortable discussing with your colleagues in a work environment, it's probably not appropriate here, either.

For example, here is a question re: CSS pre-processors that seems pretty subjective: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/181536/are-th...

It would be great if you could let users indicate preferences between answers so that you could produce an ordered graph of which answers are better than others. I'm thinking of something similar to the less wrong textbook recommendations[1] with it's rules:

   1. Post the title of your favorite textbook on a given subject.
   2. You must have read at least two other textbooks on that same subject.
   3. You must briefly name the other books you've read on the subject and explain 
      why you think your chosen textbook is superior to them.
   
   Rules #2 and #3 are to protect against recommending a bad book that only seems
   impressive because it's the only book you've read on the subject. 

AFTER EDIT: I'm thinking this would be particularly useful if you've narrowed your choice down to a few options and wanted to see comparisons between those options.

[1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/3gu/the_best_textbooks_on_every_subj...

I like idea but... the first question that interested me was

"What the best 2D Game Engine" http://slant.co/topics/what-is-the-best-2d-game-engine

And I'm confused by my options on slant. What is a 2D game engine? Can we even discuss that? Example: Phonegap, should I add it? People make games with it. They also make non-games with it. I didn't see a place to bring up this discussion (meta-discussion?)

Next: I've been looking at 2D engines recently so I thought about adding entries but I don't know the engines enough to do anything other than add them to the list. Except apparently I'm not supposed to do that? But even that is useful info (ie, to know what the choices are)

Anyway, not sure if that's useful feedback.

Good point. We plan to add something along the lines of "counterpoints" ("X does Z badly"), and we have other viewpoints ("Y does Z well"), but directly pointing users toward solutions that solve those counterpoints ("[take a look at Y, because] Y does Z better") isn't something we'd considered. I'll definitely keep that in mind as we hash out the counterpoints idea a little more. Thanks kindly.

One of the most frustrating parts of some early experiences I had with some programming classes, was a lack of "meta". So, we're learning some specific constructs... but what is the fucking context!

This is one reason such topics come up, whether on StackLatest or wherever. The new "team" members want to know where the fuck to start and what it all means.

I'm put in mind of Organic Chemistry I. A great class for "weeding out" before majors are declared. At least as I experienced it, a boatload of often "arbitrary" memorization... A real slog, when you couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Mind you, some significant percentage of "What's best?" posts are indeed people just too clueless or lazy to tackle any element of the question themselves. But... that's what voting and moderation are for.

StackOverflow seemed to be dealing with this pretty well. I don't see what the need for the change (in attitude, if not stated policy) was.