Is it worth editing this question to make it less provocative and more TCS-centric ? In other words, if such edits (what kind?) were made, would the question be valuable ?
I fail to see where the linked question is provocative. It is maybe not rhetorically brilliant, but who of us non-natives can claim otherwise?
We have entertained broad questions regarding research practice before, for instance
- Advice on good research practices (65 up, 0 down votes. 60 favorites. Does not mention TCS.)
- How do I referee a paper? (45 up, 0 down votes. 29 favorites.)
- What constitutes enough work to be cited or acknowledged? (On meta. Very related to the question at hand.)
I think we can conclude that the question posed is very relevant. If people think it is stated in too frank a way, too bad. I think it is just that: frank. Personally, I have no need for graciousness and/or political correctness in an impersonal discussion.
I decided to turn my comment into an answer.
cstheory is NOT a discussion forum.
The main kind of questions for cstheory are questions in TCS. soft-questions can be acceptable (and I have expressed my opinion previously that I support including them in the scope), but they are not the main kind of questions for cstheory (e.g. they are acceptable as long as they are infrequent). soft-questions should be held to higher standards than non-subjective questions in TCS.
I don't like when users who haven't contributed to cstheory drop by from time to time and ask subjective and controversial questions. IMO, these users should first contribute to cstheory by asking and answering questions in TCS before asking subjective and possibly controversial questions about TCS. soft-question about TCS which are not in the scope (e.g. if the answer to the question is so trivial that any researchers or graduate student in TCS would know the answer like this) then they are not suitable for cstheory.
Finally, there are different types of soft-questions. In particular, when the question is a subjective one, it can be good subjective soft-question or a bad subjective soft-question. Bad subjective soft-questions should get closed directly. (and IMHO there was not a need for locking this question.)
See this post for more on the distinction between good subjective and bad subjective.