Johnny  One of the things pointed out that the FAQs are not as clear as they need to be.  on the other side of that, people are not going to read a whole book to ask a simple question.

There either is some imperfection and interpretation in the understanding , or there is 300 page loads of rules data, that I sure as heck am not going to read.   

On one side it needs full clarity instead of  Ghestapo descisions based on few, on the other side achieving full clarity requires either having been bashed around till you find the niche the site and questions fit into, or having to read a massive book on what is and isnt allowable and approved of. 

Even with this 300 page massive book of SU Legislated point by point facts on what is and what isn't allowed. arguing each point can continue till the cows come home still.  Picking points out of the huge legislation could then be applied to concider EACH question as good or bad, and debate that till the world ends.  

Often the issue with downvoting, is it "isn't useful to WHO?"  Well I dont give a flying leap about your question, so it isnt useful to me :-).   I dont want to see the site direction head to that type of question, So get Outta here with it.  

The question didnt "show any research effort"  Because I can find 10 answers that dont work with a single web search :-) It is obvious that it isn't well researched , if I found an answer to it by researching.   80% of the questions on this site already fit that catagory,  they ave some answer on the web, FINDING it , or finding the right one, or even knowing WHAT to research for, what words to use in the search, that is different. 

I feel the "doesnt show research" would put 80% of the questions into the get outta here catagory. Leving nobody with any form of REP for having answered :-)  Nothing left on the site but a bunch of questions that can barely be answered to being with. 

When it comes to some of the tactics used to determine how the Tyranny of the Majority will be applied, the eventuality of it will be towards the majority. Creating a site only for the majority.

Does that mean the site is a Social experiment in majority rules, mob and crowd behaviour :-)     If it was it is failing in that respect , because even with the crasy mob rules in existance , the site does loosly follow the original intents, and people are on the most part not being left out when they ask questions that the Mob doesnt care about.

If users are going to waste bullets trying to shoot people down , at least they still have to pay 2c a piece for them :-)  If the ghestapo crashes in and tosses the whole thing, well we voted for them, hang around at election, and be one of the 10% that voted for them.

My opinion on DownVoting an Answer: The person Tried at least,  got a Better one we would love to hear it.  There is a flaw in the answer, know the flaw?  then tell what it is.

My opinion on a downvoted question: Why dont the Same people who find it so nesssiary to downvote a bad question, make some of the same effort to Upvote the good ones?