As a person who volunteered input, I think that’s a great way to hear bad ideas.

You either don’t know that and are going to have no filter between what’s useful input that should be internalized and what shouldn’t, possibly putting you in a dangerous and unnecessary situation or you do know and you are interested in what used to be called pot stirring and is now more often referred to as engagement farming.

But it’s not just a great way for you to hear bad ideas, it’s a great way to give bad ideas somewhere to be heard!

No matter if you know that you’re soliciting bad input or not, since the forum is public, the question by its very nature deals with safety and security and the input is solicited in an unfocused way, the results will not just be heard by you but also by everyone who looks at the thread, which is in the front page of some bigger instances.

Now rather than benignly hearing what people think or creating engagement you’re providing a space for any kind of suggestion to be given equal time, Wolverine claw keyrings get to stand alongside “speak to a lawyer about your local laws” because there is no greater context or detail that can be used to weigh one against the other.

The point of this reply isn’t to make you feel bad or call you out, but to make clear the effect that Just Asking Questions has when applied outside its usual political argument territory.

You in particular could, as the op, take action to change the state of the thread by providing more information, a jurisdiction, some specific details you’re interested in knowing about or just delete the post.