so lets stay at a same level of standards
because your consensus questions have flimsy "can be, can happen", rather then "do, are" your not asking anything finite and certain(your same standard argued this when you said my questions were not wrote correct)
i bothered to appease groupies cries with short questions of finite/certain points to answer.. also then to appease your cries of believed bias i re-reformatted my questions to be unbiased and be finite in both for/against formats of a&b variants, so perhaps you can reciprocate, by writing questions without the flimsiness of "can be, can happen" which has no certainty being asked
Statements can be conditional or situational. Take, for example, "The sky is blue - agree/disagree". Sounds simple enough, right? But what about sunrise/sunset? What about the night? It's not
always blue and, as such, is a flawed statement. So I would phrase it "The sky can be blue" - agree/disagree" because this is more accurate and takes real life circumstances into account. There is certainty that there will be times when the sky is blue. That is not "flimsy". It is factual. If someone were to disagree with the statement that the sky can be blue, it would suggest there is something amiss with their perception.
At the very least, please give it a try. If you elect to re-word any "can be" or "can happen" and open yourself up to any conditional issues in an attempt to provide a more finite answer, that is your prerogative.