And what if the correct and satisfactory answer appears within first hour or two, before even the question reaches enough votes for closing? Still delete?

You make an awful lot of assumptions about the answer being unavailable. Following your logic, all questions ever should be closed because if you don't know the answer, you can't be sure it exists.

Of course speculative answers should be downvoted, but... what about a normally commonly acceptable question that doesn't get a satisfactory answer? I'm active on quite a few .se sites and you'll hardly ever see my accept rate on any to be 100% - sometimes I ask difficult questions and don't get valid answers at all. Not because they don't exist but because nobody who saw my question knows them. Does that make my questions wrong? Should I know a'priori before asking if the answer is available?

Making up a rule that depends on the asker knowing a whole lot about the answer is pointless: you ask questions to which you don't know answers.

Making a rule that forbids a question because the answer might be impossible to attain is throwing out the baby with the bath water. A whole bunch of good questions will be forbidden on basis that they might be unanswerable.

If you really feel so sick about leaving some questions unanswered, delete them a month after they received their last unsatisfactory answer. But personally, I'd leave them - just for people seeking the answer to be able to find out:

The Answer Does Not Exist Or Is Uobtainable.

This is a satisfactory answer if it's true. There is no point to consider the question invalid simply because that is the answer.

EDIT

Just to make it clear, repeating my comment here: Yes, authoritative answers to these questions can only be obtained from creators. BUT WHY DIRECTLY?! They are the very daily bread for these creators, appearing regularly in their blogs (frequently buried 20 pages in, of an obscure site), in panels from conferences (often recorded as Youtube videos) or in articles posted on niche magazines many issues back.

That means they are very frequently available, obtainable, possible to locate - but not by a single person. You can't google a sentence uttered in the middle of a hourly panel in youtube video. You can't google contents of paper magazine you don't even own. You won't pick out the author's post on his own site from a thousand similar posts filled with speculations if you don't even know what is his site.

But then, if you post such a question, it will immediately ring a bell with a fan who saw/read the author's answer in the past. They have the blog bookmarked and limiting Google search to that single site they can find it in a minute. Typing conference name and the author name will bring up the video of the panel in Youtube search immediately. Finding the article in the pile of magazines under the bed will take a while but then the answer is there and can be retyped together with the issue number and page for reference.

In other words, LOCATING these answers is possible primarily through community effort.

Do you think forbidding this kind of answers is right, just because there is a chance that the author never did answer this question in the past?

Excuse me, let us close all General Relativity questions on Physics.se because Albert Einstein isn't willing to answer them in person. The fact these answers are contained within his journal? But gasp! what if they are not?!

And what if the correct and satisfactory answer appears within first hour or two, before even the question reaches enough votes for closing? Still delete?

You make an awful lot of assumptions about the answer being unavailable. Following your logic, all questions ever should be closed because if you don't know the answer, you can't be sure it exists.

Of course speculative answers should be downvoted, but... what about a normally commonly acceptable question that doesn't get a satisfactory answer? I'm active on quite a few .se sites and you'll hardly ever see my accept rate on any to be 100% - sometimes I ask difficult questions and don't get valid answers at all. Not because they don't exist but because nobody who saw my question knows them. Does that make my questions wrong? Should I know a'priori before asking if the answer is available?

Making up a rule that depends on the asker knowing a whole lot about the answer is pointless: you ask questions to which you don't know answers.

Making a rule that forbids a question because the answer might be impossible to attain is throwing out the baby with the bath water. A whole bunch of good questions will be forbidden on basis that they might be unanswerable.

If you really feel so sick about leaving some questions unanswered, delete them a month after they received their last unsatisfactory answer. But personally, I'd leave them - just for people seeking the answer to be able to find out:

The Answer Does Not Exist Or Is Uobtainable.

This is a satisfactory answer if it's true. There is no point to consider the question invalid simply because that is the answer.

EDIT

Just to make it clear, repeating my comment here: Yes, authoritative answers to these questions can only be obtained from creators. BUT WHY DIRECTLY?! They are the very daily bread for these creators, appearing regularly in their blogs (frequently buried 20 pages in, of an obscure site), in panels from conferences (often recorded as Youtube videos) or in articles posted on niche magazines many issues back. Oh, and more frequently than not they are posted in Japanese.

That means they are very frequently available, obtainable, possible to locate - but not by a single person. You can't google a sentence uttered in the middle of a hourly panel in youtube video. You can't google contents of paper magazine you don't even own. You won't pick out the author's post on his own site from a thousand similar posts filled with speculations if you don't even know what is his site.

But then, if you post such a question, it will immediately ring a bell with a fan who saw/read the author's answer in the past. They have the blog bookmarked and limiting Google search to that single site they can find it in a minute. Typing conference name and the author name will bring up the video of the panel in Youtube search immediately. Finding the article in the pile of magazines under the bed will take a while but then the answer is there and can be retyped together with the issue number and page for reference.

In other words, LOCATING these answers is possible primarily through community effort.

Do you think forbidding this kind of answers is right, just because there is a chance that the author never did answer this question in the past?

Excuse me, let us close all General Relativity questions on Physics.se because Albert Einstein isn't willing to answer them in person. The fact these answers are contained within his journal? But gasp! what if they are not?!

And what if the correct and satisfactory answer appears within first hour or two, before even the question reaches enough votes for closing? Still delete?

You make an awful lot of assumptions about the answer being unavailable. Following your logic, all questions ever should be closed because if you don't know the answer, you can't be sure it exists.

Of course speculative answers should be downvoted, but... what about a normally commonly acceptable question that doesn't get a satisfactory answer? I'm active on quite a few .se sites and you'll hardly ever see my accept rate on any to be 100% - sometimes I ask difficult questions and don't get valid answers at all. Not because they don't exist but because nobody who saw my question knows them. Does that make my questions wrong? Should I know a'priori before asking if the answer is available?

Making up a rule that depends on the asker knowing a whole lot about the answer is pointless: you ask questions to which you don't know answers.

Making a rule that forbids a question because the answer might be impossible to attain is throwing out the baby with the bath water. A whole bunch of good questions will be forbidden on basis that they might be unanswerable.

If you really feel so sick about leaving some questions unanswered, delete them a month after they received their last unsatisfactory answer. But personally, I'd leave them - just for people seeking the answer to be able to find out:

The Answer Does Not Exist Or Is Uobtainable.

This is a satisfactory answer if it's true. There is no point to consider the question invalid simply because that is the answer.

And what if the correct and satisfactory answer appears within first hour or two, before even the question reaches enough votes for closing? Still delete?

You make an awful lot of assumptions about the answer being unavailable. Following your logic, all questions ever should be closed because if you don't know the answer, you can't be sure it exists.

Of course speculative answers should be downvoted, but... what about a normally commonly acceptable question that doesn't get a satisfactory answer? I'm active on quite a few .se sites and you'll hardly ever see my accept rate on any to be 100% - sometimes I ask difficult questions and don't get valid answers at all. Not because they don't exist but because nobody who saw my question knows them. Does that make my questions wrong? Should I know a'priori before asking if the answer is available?

Making up a rule that depends on the asker knowing a whole lot about the answer is pointless: you ask questions to which you don't know answers.

Making a rule that forbids a question because the answer might be impossible to attain is throwing out the baby with the bath water. A whole bunch of good questions will be forbidden on basis that they might be unanswerable.

If you really feel so sick about leaving some questions unanswered, delete them a month after they received their last unsatisfactory answer. But personally, I'd leave them - just for people seeking the answer to be able to find out:

The Answer Does Not Exist Or Is Uobtainable.

This is a satisfactory answer if it's true. There is no point to consider the question invalid simply because that is the answer.

EDIT

Just to make it clear, repeating my comment here: Yes, authoritative answers to these questions can only be obtained from creators. BUT WHY DIRECTLY?! They are the very daily bread for these creators, appearing regularly in their blogs (frequently buried 20 pages in, of an obscure site), in panels from conferences (often recorded as Youtube videos) or in articles posted on niche magazines many issues back.

That means they are very frequently available, obtainable, possible to locate - but not by a single person. You can't google a sentence uttered in the middle of a hourly panel in youtube video. You can't google contents of paper magazine you don't even own. You won't pick out the author's post on his own site from a thousand similar posts filled with speculations if you don't even know what is his site.

But then, if you post such a question, it will immediately ring a bell with a fan who saw/read the author's answer in the past. They have the blog bookmarked and limiting Google search to that single site they can find it in a minute. Typing conference name and the author name will bring up the video of the panel in Youtube search immediately. Finding the article in the pile of magazines under the bed will take a while but then the answer is there and can be retyped together with the issue number and page for reference.

In other words, LOCATING these answers is possible primarily through community effort.

Do you think forbidding this kind of answers is right, just because there is a chance that the author never did answer this question in the past?

Excuse me, let us close all General Relativity questions on Physics.se because Albert Einstein isn't willing to answer them in person. The fact these answers are contained within his journal? But gasp! what if they are not?!