When a question is asked, the mods and folks in the classroom and guidance office make judgements about it. Is this a good question? Some criteria are used to give advice to OPs and even to close questions. People want the criteria to be objective and one of the "supposedly objective" criteria is "does this question have an objectively best answer. I think that in the recent discussions, the word objectively is being misused: That word doesn't mean what you think it means. This post (Advances in CS appropriate for CS1 and CS2 made by female computer scientists) for example asks for "Who, then, are scientists that are, or were, prominent in the field of computer science and whose important work is appropriate to incorporate into the early years of a CS degree?". There is no objectively best answer to that question. I can't say that strongly enough. There are tons of great answers and some are better than others, but none can be best unless you are willing to consider "all possible women in cs" and "all statements made about them" and rank them.
However, after a lot of answers come in, you can choose (pretty subjectively) the best among the answers you got, or you can apply the "most votes" criteria which sounds objective, but is really an aggregation of subjective votes by members. But, you say it's all we got.
Well maybe so, but by that criteria EVERY possible question has a "best" answer. Just wait for the votes, count them up. Done. Best. But then a better answer comes in.
Instead of looking for a criteria that can be applied at the beginning of the process that expects an objectively best answer, I suggest the following be used instead.
There should be some criteria, perhaps implicit and perhaps explicit in the question, by which answers can be judged on a somewhat linear scale. This is better because "Grace Hopper is more important than, say Barbara Liskov" or "this answer is more complete than that answer." Not a linear scale, of course, but you can compare, but I defy you to pick a best. Barbara Liskov's substitution principle, for example is likely about as important in CS1 as any other, including the work of Hopper on, say, Cobol.
You say Hopper, I say Liskov. Not objective. Neither is "best". Each is important, And moreover each is "more important" or "better" than the other depending on your criteria.
So, I pray you. Don't expect or look for best. Comparable is as high a standard as you will be able to reach.
Moreover, what is needed by the mods and others is judgement. Look at it, consider its ups and downs, use criteria not as absolute rules but as guides to a wise decision. It will be inherently subjective. Live with it.
The problem is that the criteria for selecting answers must be able to be applied before any answers have been written. The criteria therefore can NOT be entirely dependent on the answers that happen to be given. Unless you have a time machine.