I feel we are in a bit of an awkward position on Engineering SE at present due to a three-way tie between answers to a scoping question.
The question defines a particular category of question on the site, links to four examples and asks whether they should be considered on-topic or off-topic.
There are three answers, suggesting three different approaches:
- Close them as off-topic;
- Don't close them, but improve them as much as possible;
- Close some, but not others, based on a qualitative metric.
Each answer has a score of +3/-0 and is provided by a moderator or high-rep user. The question was asked nearly two weeks ago and has been featured for over a week, attracting ~100 views, but the answers remain tied.
As a member of the moderator team, I feel we have an obligation to implement some kind of policy toward these questions, even if that policy is that they are treated the same as any other question. We've done all that we can do to draw attention to the question, including asking in chat. It seems the only option remaining is to make an executive decision about which proposed policy to adopt but that could be seen as rule by fiat, especially since we authored two of the three proposals ourselves.
How can we resolve this tie vote in a way that respects the community's wishes and empowers regular users to make policy? Is it enough to say that we had the discussion and the "tie goes to the moderator?"
One of my specific concerns for the future is that, when we end up closing questions as a result of a scoping discussion, usually we'd point back to the Meta Q&A where that consensus was reached. In this case, pointing back to Meta would probably be confusing and counter-productive since there is no consensus.