This meta post is inspired by a specific recent answer, but it's more general in scope.

Let's say someone posts a question asking about resources or possibilities for something specific - as in the linked example, dairies that sell milk but don't kill their cows. Then someone else posts an answer which, instead of directly answering the question, argues (sensibly, with evidence) that it's the wrong question to ask.

Generally, on Stack Exchange, these are called frame challenge answers: challenging the frame of assumptions within which the question was asked. What do we think about such answers on the V&V site specifically? On the one hand, maybe a question really can be the wrong question to ask, and a well-argued answer to that effect can have its value. On the other hand, our whole thing is basically "trying to do X without Y" (to make certain types of food without certain animal products, for example) and not judging each other's choices, so too many answers saying "there's no point in looking for X without Y, because Z" could potentially undermine the site.

  • What definition of Vegan does this site use? Just not eating animal products? Not digging in the soil like Jain and Theravadan monks? Not eating Wheat and other grains because combines kill every animal in there path? Jain often wear masks and sweep the path in front of them, is this a requirement of this sites definition? Feb 3 at 12:05

1 Answer 1


Our title says that our community is vegans and vegetarians. We need to encourage both of those overlapping constituencies to ask questions and be happy that those questions get valid answers.

If we have a significant amount of frame challenges to questions about dairy, eggs and honey etc then our site will be

  1. Not very useful to vegetarians
  2. Rather unfriendly to them too

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .