One difficult question concerning this site is how to deal with fringe positions which are wildly out of keeping with the evidence. Many such positions are firmly held by users and possible users of our site. For example,
- Aramaic primacy
- Mythicism (the idea there was no historical Jesus)
- Young Earth Creationism
- Mormon anthropology
- The phantom time hypothesis
On the one hand, I think that in the interests of collaboration between people who disagree, we should be respectful of other people's beliefs even when they are fringe. On the other hand, I do not think that the "show your work" requirements mean that people must justify the mainstream non-fringe point of view every time they want to ask a question. We shouldn't have to write "What did the original Greek say (assuming Greek primacy)" in every question, and we shouldn't have to write "Assuming that the first few chapters of Genesis are not literally true" in order to ask a question under that assumption.
The initial response to this question suggests that the default viewpoint of most active users on this site is YEC, and that questioners holding mainstream scientific viewpoints are viewed with suspicion. I do not think it's possible to have a site that is welcoming to non-evangelicals and reacts with this level of hostility (multiple downvotes and a highly upvoted critical comment from moderator) to questions that assume mainstream scientific knowledge.