**NO modification, keep ID questions off-topic**. I'd like that policy to remain as is, *a minima* for the title of the movie. Here are my points:

I think this policy, despite being perceived as harsh and constraining, is the one that this community needs. Why? Because, having seen how it works for years, my opinion is that identification questions lower the quality level of this stack.

Of course, these questions attract new users and generate some traffic, but these persons, for most of them, won't stay after they get their answer and never contribute again. And we're stuck with **one** question and answer(s) that will benefit **one** person only. That is not what SE should be about, what it was built for, a library of knowledge, intended for the many.

Beside that, low quality questions ask for much more work than the average question.  I can only rank these as "*gimme th3 c0d3*" type of question on SO. They're different in essence, but the spirit is the same: I don't know, so feed me with the answer I need, and *ciao bambino!*

Identification questions are no more than a fun trivia, like the one you can play with family and friends. "*Guess who?*". "*Pict it*". And others I don't know. Fun for a while, but not that much.

I know users can set their homepage to ignore the `identification` tag, but many don't even know that, and I'm pretty sure the vast majority of visitors will see a homepage filled with many ID questions, misleading them about the core of this stack. Closing your eyes doesn't make the dirt disappear, it hides it for you, but the stains are still here, and the others can still see it.

ID questions are low-quality items, badly written most of the time, and degrade the overall quality of the stack. They're bad apples that will stain the basket.

There are some other points that can be discussed, such as music, because it can be likened to props, and be an important part of the movie? But then, it would depend on the importance, on the relation to the narration...etc

As stated by Jeff Atwood in his blog post [Let's Play The Guessing Game](https://stackoverflow.blog/2012/02/29/lets-play-the-guessing-game/):

> The question owner tries to describe something they can't quite remember, in hopes that the greater community will "buzz in" to hazard an answer based on the limited information provided, like on a game show. The best guess gets upvotes, and potentially an accepted answer checkmark. It's fun, right?
> 
> Of course, guessing game questions aren't a new phenomenon; I alluded to them in the Pee-Wee Herman Rule. But after a year of observing these guessing game questions grow and spread to multiple sites with similar effects, **I no longer believe that the slight benefit of these questions outweighs the many negatives**.

When people say that the rules of a stack should be modified because a majority of users wants to, is it potentially a sense of democracy or a *coup d'état*? If tomorrow I find myself regrouped with many people who want the right to curse all throughout the posts and insult others, just because I get loads of upvotes, do we need to allow this?

Just because a post is upvoted, an another one downvoted, then the winner is... ? Is that really the kind of childish decision our community needs for such an important matter? Shouldn't we look at the greater picture, and still aim for excellence instead of some "kind of trivia fun"?

If people want to change the established rules, it has to be for the greater good of many, not just the few dozen (at best) willing to. New blood? Maybe. What about the old blood? Too old, so get rid of it? Many users may have left when ID questions got cut, but many users will probably also leave if this stack is flooded with low quality posts.