Timeline for What constitutes an answer on Meta?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2018 at 19:06 | comment | added | Richard | @JonEricson - My comment was that it wasn't an appropriate answer | |
| Mar 9, 2018 at 19:05 | comment | added | Jon Ericson | Nobody forced you to comment on that answer, @Richard. Obviously that answer baited you into a new discussion, but it takes two to tango, ya know? | |
| Mar 9, 2018 at 12:21 | comment | added | jpmc26 | @Richard When the topic is an issue the policy up for debate needs to address and possibly be adjusted to account for, how do you distinguish "new" discussions from ones that belong with the current policy Q&A? What's the criteria you want to use? | |
| Mar 9, 2018 at 6:18 | comment | added | Richard | @jpmc26 - The goal is to discuss the point raised, not to open the floodgates to someone using their answer as bait to provoke an entirely new discussion. | |
| Mar 8, 2018 at 22:57 | comment | added | jpmc26 | @Richard Obviously, I'm biased here, but I'm confused about what you think that policy would accomplish. If a policy or community norm is being discussed for refinement or even change, isn't it better to have discussions about the relevant factors centralized in one Q&A? What's the pragmatic consideration for breaking off every subpoint that doesn't have an immediate resolution to a new post? How does doing so improve the quality of the discussion? | |
| Mar 8, 2018 at 22:54 | comment | added | jpmc26 | I think perhaps the mention of rhetorical questions has confused some users about your answer. If I'm reading your post correctly, that's just an off-hand reference (possibly even a lead in to a joke), whereas the rest of your answer here is talking about a different kind of question (the kind the linked answer exemplifies). | |
| Mar 8, 2018 at 22:28 | comment | added | Jon Ericson | @Möoz: It does make sense. But in context, it's clear the question about the system feature is an argument about the policy. If I asked on meta whether we should allow questions in answers, someone might ask if there's a way to post comments longer than 600 characters. The implied point is that comments are not subtable for good answers, so maybe answers shouldn't have questions. An ideal answer would connect the dots, but that's not a requirement every time. | |
| Mar 8, 2018 at 22:13 | comment | added | Möoz | The OP asks about policy, whereas the answer asks about a system feature. I hope that makes sense. | |
| Mar 8, 2018 at 22:11 | comment | added | Möoz | I think you've misinterpreted the particular post in question: it's not really asking a rhetorical question, or even asking for clarification; it's actually asking about a new set of problems, that (and I think this is the important part) can/should be addressed in it's own post. | |
| Mar 7, 2018 at 22:13 | comment | added | Jon Ericson | @Richard: The point of the answer was heavily implied. Your proposed answer missed it entirely. | |
| Mar 7, 2018 at 22:03 | comment | added | Richard | To my mind rhetorical questions are just fine. Actual questions probably aren't | |
| Mar 7, 2018 at 21:51 | comment | added | Servy | I would consider posting a rhetorical question designed to make your point in an answer to be pretty radically different from posting a sincere question expecting an answer. I get the impression this meta question was asking about the latter, not the former. | |
| Mar 7, 2018 at 21:48 | history | answered | Jon Ericson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |