Consider this question:
and the ongoing chat about the correctness of the currently top-rated answer:
The question here should be a straight question of fact. There's no real opinion involved - Either the law requires plan sponsors to allow participants to get out or it doesn't. There are two answers that differ on which is allowed. For sure, one or the other is factually wrong. "Voting" is not going to resolve this in general.
Whether or not it's elevated the correct answer in this case is mostly beside the point for this meta question. On the other hand, this specific question is a good case study, IMO, because
- User Chris has taken some effort to provide evidence for his position, which is the answer with many fewer votes
- The "other side" is a high "rep" user and a moderator, who have ("High Rep User") essentially called Chris stupid ("I'm not here to teach you to read, if you're more than 3 years old that ship has sailed.") and have ("moderator") told Chris that he must be wrong because high rep users on this site haven't heard of this ("I guess what I am stuck on is the idea that if this were true, wouldn't we have seen it?"). (In light of the comment, I want to be clear that's two different things done by two different users.)
- This dynamic, IMO, is consistently repeated on this site, which has a strong tendency toward "the community" self-reinforcing its own idiosyncrasies and bullying users who (with evidence on questions of fact!) don't go along with the high-rep users / moderators.
- What other mechanism is there for resolving such issues here? Should something like this be elevated to the SE ownership?
- Do members of this community care that factually wrong answers will at least occasionally get elevated, or is that just considered a possible consequence of free, online help?
- In the case where a answer is clearly wrong as a matter of fact, are the moderators expected and/or obligated to delete it? In a case like this where one must be wrong but they are no sure which, how to proceed?