Why is this question put on hold, and how could it be avoided?

Question

For reference the question is here: What species, given sapience, has the best chance defeating humanity?

I don't understand why the question was put on hold. It was marked as primarily opinion based, but several of the answers do include quite a bit of fact.

There are some leaps of logic involved in using that fact to support the story in the question, but if your going to discount those leaps in logic then the entire site is off topic.

If the hold status is correct, then how can it be avoided? The question seems to ask a direct question, that can be supported by current day fact, even if those facts have to be "extended" a bit to build a story from.

Answer 1

I like this answer from a previous question about opinion-based closures. The closure is not that answers will have opinions, but that answers will be primarily opinions. If answers are primarily opinions, there's no way to evaluate how correct an answer is, just which one people like more. Further, opinion-based questions are nearly always too broad as well.

In this case, there's not an animal on the planet that isn't a contender, and no answer will be more correct than any others, simply more liked.

Contrast with this recent question about what to name an ultimate ruler. There's a fairly small list of possible answers, and some are more correct than others given the parameter of the question (Norse/Northern European culture, specifics of the ruler's rulership).

Answer 2

I don't know

Looks like people are interested in subject, and willing to answer Q, why to stop them, quality of answers looks good, Question is probably too broad and because of that can't be answered correctly by one person.

Personally I do not like that opinion based reason to close, trough also I do not like that question. But some people needs opinions as answers.
Or they just want one possible solution, not important which one.(so could he exploit that farther and write story that way, is that good, is that bad, it's that to much attention for one person, is that abuse of system, peoples who answers, are we fine to stimulate such type of behavior or not, or we better will cut all problems and efforts needed for regulate that mess?)

Problem is:

One of the reasons it provokes low quality A, because why to to write answer it so hard and so broad, chances to answer it right are minimal
but you may just joke bump free points and satisfaction.

Also it looks like power users problem - in sense of their understanding how things should work, and in keeping status quo.

Which is result of how here system (on SE) works. System did, and do good job - no body wish some negative changes.

Ideology is Q have A, in Unix part of SE thats possibly more true, you may check and verify answer and etc. For WB it works not so well, as my opinion.

Solution begin to be active power user, convince other power users, understand their evaluation system.

System is't perfect, as example down-voting for answers it means almost nothing, so it do almost no regulation for answers.
So as voting system it'selfs is subjective - it helps at some extent but. It results for voters to act not that way it was intended to be.

If you wished to answer but have no luck in that, f this live is hard, be faster next time, many wished to answer and answered question.

If asking and getting answers, OP got probably all answers he needed and could in that situation, so closing answer did't changed anything for him.

Social interaction, tricky rules, everything as usual.
Wish I WB without rules(direct or opinion based)? No, I don't, there are other places for that(2ch, 4ch) and so on. But being honest, any place have rules ad hoc or de facto - even if that place says with big letters: There is no rules.

I would like to have opinion based tag, so OP may clearly state He needs, some solution or inspiration, Although he will probably choose random answer or not choose any answer like accepted.

Thus who answers may decide participate or not, and is possibility to affect OP in his world building, in form of answer, worth their efforts or not.
Although that situation dangerously close to discussion and then to chat and ... not being enlisted in Google searches, and .....