I got one or two questions rejected tonight. Almost many of my proposed questions were rejected for no reason.
Here’s a couple of my rejected questions so far.
I got one or two questions rejected tonight. Almost many of my proposed questions were rejected for no reason.
Here’s a couple of my rejected questions so far.
I can’t really do anything other than speculate, but here’s my two cents on a few of the questions you included:
Also - as an outside opinion for ID6488. I’m not sure what answers or sources were offered here, but from my memory cheating has always been allowed (potentially encouraged) through official Monopoly rules for the banker. I also am vaguely aware of a “cheaters version” of the game released within the last decade or so that you may be referencing instead. I’m not too sure if any of these games “introduce” the player to cheating but would instead inform players that cheating is allowed if you can get away with it (the specific cheaters version may be different, I’ve not played this version).
Hope you get some answers on the questions but figured I’d give you some feedback!
I think the reason why these questions were rejected were either because they were too vague / opinionated or the way they were written would be difficult to understand for a native English speaker.
I read your explanations for the answers that you posted above.
I would argue that ID6496, ID7034, and ID6495 are too vague / opinionated as they are to have a single answer (many unpatched griefing methods in TF2, fandom related things could be subjective, what scam in particular?)
ID6493, ID6488, and ID7989 could be reworded to make them more comprehensible. For example, “What animated film plagiarized a controversial Oscar-nominated lawsuit?” could be “Disney was accused of plagiarizing a screenplay for the story, themes, design, and name for which of their animated films?”
ID7991 seems fine. ID6492 might just need doublechecking. ID6489 also looks fine if all that is missing is punctuation.