I agree with this direction; public figures are public indeed, but the way we ask questions speaks volumes about us, too.
For example, there’s no need to shy away from controversy, as long as we frame the question in a way that – should we find ourselves in a spotlight – we’d be facing defensible questions – not being cornered. Maybe this is the old fashioned, “ask about others, the way you’d want others to ask about you”.
Thus when asking about controversial issues such as Arnold Schwarzenegger’s infidelities — I find no reason to avoid naming him (come on, it’s all over the news, we’re not exactly the National Enquirer squad if we came right out and said it!) — instead, I’d be interested in a question about the terrible choices public figures made in their private lives and whether we as citizens who elect these people in office would personally or on principle equate their private indiscretions as part of how we evaluate their public competence and trustworthiness. This type of question is defensible and may be asked on Quora, in my opinion.
If we want to query whether a CEO “sucks” – we can easily create a defensible question by clarifying what we mean by “suck”. Because each of us may have a different suck-o-meter. In order for a question to remain relevant to the largest number of people, it becomes my burden to make the question clear, so that I can get answers directed to the crux of the issue behind my question.
What is this? I’ve begun using more of the “comment” section of good answers on Quora instead of writing my own answers. This is an archive of my comments on Quora.
