I think it depends on the question to some degree.
There are some questions that have objective answers via, e.g. surveys of AI researchers. For example, the question of when AI researchers believe "Hard AI" will be created is objectively answerable via this method.
I think in general though, questions like the one in that meta-post actually belong on academia.se, a site where you could reasonably expect to get a broad range of opinions from researchers even in a relatively narrow area, and where questions like "How do I get the most out of open sourced code in research papers?" would surely be on-topic.
In general, I think we should adopt the following heuristic:
- If the question is about the opinions of AI researchers about something in AI, it is on topic here and potentially answerable, though we should require quality sources in such answers. Example: "Does the AI research community have a consensus view on whether deep neural networks can be made explainable?".
- If the question is about the practices of AI researchers, or about their opinions about research practices, it is off-topic here and belongs on the academia.se stack. Example: "How does one become an AI researcher?" or "How do AI researchers use the code provided with some papers?".
A grey area is questions about AI-specific research methodologies. (e.g. "What is the right hypothesis test to use when comparing machine learning methods?"). I would say these could potentially be on topic on many sites, and we should generally be permissive about them.