First, I agree with the premises of [this Meta question](https://travel.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/728/is-there-a-preferred-way-to-ask-about-first-hand-experience) and its accepted answer:

> 
> There are a lot of questions with factual answers that can be researched online. I can go through travel forums and come up with what I think is a valid conclusion based on what people say.  
> 
>  One of the key values of Travel.SE for me is that I can ask for people that have first hand experience. It really means a lot more to me if someone with an established reputation here can answer a question based on experience (as opposed to researching or using second hand information).
> 
> 
> 

...and its accepted answer: 

> 
> The benefit of a site like this is that the people on here usually enjoy talking about their experiences, and if they see one like that they'll likely be happy to help. There's no specific way of asking - it all depends on what you're after ... the more detail about what you want as an answer, the better.
> 
> 
> 

[This meta question](https://travel.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1587/is-there-a-tag-to-require-real-life-travel-experience) has a similar premise:

> 
> Sometimes you need a been there, seen it, done it kind of answer.
> 
> 
> 

---

However, [this question](https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/68652/which-cities-transit-cards-interfere-with-each-other/68658?noredirect=1#comment147159_68658) I recently posted is disparaged by multiple users because answers would be "[anecdotal](https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/68652/which-cities-transit-cards-interfere-with-each-other?noredirect=1#comment147021_68652) [information](https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/68652/which-cities-transit-cards-interfere-with-each-other/68658?noredirect=1#comment147139_68652)." The question seeks factual information, not subjective opinions. The second paragraph gives very specific criteria and the third paragraph further spells out intended uses that provides another specifying test for what answers would be considered addressing the question (i.e. if the answer could serve the purpose of that knowledge spelled out there). 

The question could be answered with business information ("Company X writes here that they sold system Y to cities A, B, and C") or technical engineering information ([neo's answer](https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/68658/31076) is a step in that direction; interference tests can also be part of engineering specs and tests), though it is most likely to be answered by travelers' direct experiences. That's why it's asked on a site "[for road warriors and seasoned travelers](https://travel.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic)" and not on a more technical SE. 

Neo [explains the decision rule](https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/68652/which-cities-transit-cards-interfere-with-each-other?noredirect=1#comment147152_68658) that *if a question is asking about something that requires travelers to draw on first hand ("in the wild") experiences, "that's the reason this question is closed here,"* even if the experience-based answers are about objective facts rather than subjective opinion. **Is that a valid reason why a question is closed on this site?** It seems like a decision rule that is inconsistent with the descriptions of this site quoted above and elsewhere, but here's the meta question to ask directly.

---

*I put "in the wild" in quotes because places with public transit are generally not "wild" in my usual definition of the term.* 

Please note this meta question is about the *decision rule,* and the meta question/discussion is intended to be helpful in a forward-looking sense to help guide what kind of questions can be asked on this site and if the cited reason is/should be a valid reason for closing a question (that can be learned by reading this, before a potential future question is even asked).