24

A recent answer I saw disregarded missing information in the question, and the answerer explicitly mentioned that they're trying to answer a different question raised in a comment (Do you know how to get the "Fraction cached" value programmatically?), rather than the original question.

When I called it out, the answerer mentioned:

SO is here to help people find answers to their questions. What way it happens is secondary.

This seems like an incorrect statement. How would you advise to respond? Also, would you flag this as Not An Answer?

11
  • 3
    The help centre is a good first step if you want to educate people on rules and guidelines. The downvote button os a good first step if you want to rate the answer. Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 18:28
  • 19
    Tangentially, although related: please do not post an answer if you believe the question should be closed.
    – yivi
    Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 18:43
  • 4
    It's not "not an answer". Read this for additional details regarding that angle.
    – yivi
    Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 18:45
  • 1
    @yivi - agreed, deleted my answer. Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 19:33
  • 1
    Either: (1) downvote and move on. Or (2): flag as NAA (an orange isn't an apple), downvote and move on. Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 21:05
  • I would also potentially suggest: (3) Flag as NAA, downvote, cast a delete vote and move on. However, we discourage delete votes on posts being discussed on Meta. Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 21:08
  • @AdrianMole: Don't NAA flag an answer that is answering a question, just not the one asked. Mods apparently want to reserve NAA for obvious garbage, and will usually decline NAA on posts that look like answers to some question, whether it's exactly the they're posted under or not. e.g. Cody's answer on Not-an-answer flag declined on an answer that's clearly a comment on the programming language/CPU design, not an answer to any programming question states this position clearly. I guess enough people use it as a VLQ synonym that mods only want that Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 8:51
  • @PeterCordes A fair point, indeed. However, the first bullet point in Cody's answer is: obviously irrelevant to the question. The question here is, when is something "obvious"? Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 8:54
  • 1
    @PeterCordes To my understanding, the reason for why NAA is treated as "not an answer to any question", as opposed to "not an answer to the question" is not because of users flagging that way, but because it's a much more effective flag when treated that way. The number of non-answers is massive, and if mods were routinely expected to evaluate the question, comments, etc to judge NAA, the amount of time needed per flag on average would be substantially longer. (Note that some mods will look at a bunch of context, but not all mods do, so that shouldn't be the default assumption).
    – cigien
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 15:59
  • @cigien: Yeah, there are sensible reasons for NAA being handled the way it is, the problem is that the flagging UI doesn't describe how it actually should be used. (And that VLQ might as well not exist; given the way VLQ is handled, AFAIK there are no cases where it would be accepted but NAA wouldn't. So that's just pure UI clutter for very slightly different end results. If we want two separate flags, one should be "not an answer at all", and the other "answering a different question" or something like "misplaced answer".) Commented Oct 14, 2021 at 5:07
  • 1
    @PeterCordes Indeed, the flagging UI is misleading, and VLQ is not a useful flag, by and large. This has come up in discussions before, and IIRC, one of the major problems with adjusting the wording is that the flagging UI is the same across all sites on the network. I don't believe it's feasible (but I could be wrong) to change it just on SO. Changing it network wide is definitely out of the question, since NAA actually does mean "not an answer to the question" on other sites.
    – cigien
    Commented Oct 14, 2021 at 19:33

3 Answers 3

18

The Q&A format of Stack Overflow is quite clear on this: a user posts a question about a specific programming problem, and other users (or even the OP themself) answers that question. Ignoring the question and answering some other question posed in a comment, even if it's related to the actual question, is inappropriate.

You could point this out, politely, in a comment on their answer. If the user disagrees, I would suggest backing off, as prolonged arguments tend not to go well for anyone involved.

What you can do for the answer itself is the usual:

  • Leave a comment pointing out that it doesn't answer the question (you've already done this if you've tried educating the OP, so don't bother leaving an additional comment that says the same thing).

  • Downvote the answer as a signal to other users that there are issues with the answer.

  • Vote to delete the answer if you have the privilege to do so.

  • Ask for help in a chat room that focuses on moderating content, such as SOCVR. Please make sure to read the FAQ first so that you follow the room rules.

  • Do not raise a NAA flag. The answer may be answering the wrong question, but that would require actually reading the question and/or comments, and that disqualifies it from being NAA flaggable.

    You could raise a custom flag instead, and explain clearly that the answer should be deleted as it doesn't answer the question. This may, or may not, result in the answer being deleted. An answer to a comment may be tangentially related to the question, and could require an SME to judge its relevance. The moderator handling the flag might not be able to make that call, and since moderator deletions are binding, they are (very understandably) reluctant to do so unless the post is indisputably delete-worthy.

17
  • 1
    The fact that the additional question asked in a comment was asked BY THE OP should be taken into consideration.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 16:39
  • 7
    @barbecue Not really. Who asked the question doesn't matter if the question is in a comment. If it's the OP who asked the question in a comment, they can edit the question to include that question (while making sure to not ask multiple questions in the question, or to invalidate existing answers). Until then, the comment is just a comment, and should absolutely not be answered in an answer. Answering a question posed as a comment in a comment is fine though.
    – cigien
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 16:45
  • 3
    Not sure that this canonical approach will be always productive. Just look at how lively was the XY Problem discussion right here, on meta -- meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem. (Yes, I think the question that started this particular discussion is somewhat XY inspired.)
    – mazaneicha
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 17:03
  • 2
    @mazaneicha Sure, if the OP is asking what you think is an XY problem, then absolutely work with the OP (via comments) to fix the question to ask the actual question the OP means to ask. You could even help the OP by editing the question yourself, but be careful not to change the OP's intent. However, this must all be done before posting an answer to the underlying question. A big reason (but not the only one) for this is that upon receiving a helpful answer, OPs are typically not inclined to edit their question, which leaves a dangling answer for future readers.
    – cigien
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 17:12
  • @cigien your must seems to suggest to obliterate a valid answer that would otherwise be still findable albeit with a little more effort. Is that right? :O
    – mazaneicha
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 17:28
  • 1
    The irony is that you ignored OP's 3 actual questions here. Is it "secondary" or not?
    – MWB
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 17:30
  • 2
    @mazaneicha The term "obliterate" makes it sound bleak, but yes, that's what I mean; such an answer should be deleted. There appear to be some misconceptions in your comment I think I should clear up. a) an answer is only valid if it answers the question in the question box. Answers are not valid just because they answer some question (even if related). b) The question is findable now, but that's strictly temporary. Any and all comments may be deleted at any time for any reason. When that happens, the answer is useless, and in fact, actively confusing since it doesn't answer the question.
    – cigien
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 17:39
  • 2
    @bobcat I think you're getting overly hung up on the use of the word "secondary". Whether that word is accurate, or not, isn't particularly relevant to the discussion as far as I can tell. I believe I've answered the salient aspects of the OP's question without referring to that specific word, and so I don't intend to elaborate on that aspect in my answer.
    – cigien
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 17:52
  • How you don't change the OP "intent" in a XY question? You need to change the question to ask X instead of Y which usually means removing the Y aspect and focusing on the X aspect. There's no way around it.
    – Braiam
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 11:08
  • 1
    I guess destroying useful information is the price we must pay for maintaining a pristine and perfect environment. Oh wait, we don't have that anyway.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 15:06
  • 1
    @cigien Your argument seems to be that validity (according to an arbitrary and capricious standard that is inconsistently enforced) is more important than utility (the actual helpfulness or usefulness of the content. ) This, in a nutshell is why SO has such a terrible reputation for being hostile to newcomers. Destroying information because you dislike the presentation of that information seems to be the popular stance here. Another reason I don't ever ask questions here. It's fruitless and pointless, because perfectionism will always lead to punishment.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 15:10
  • 1
    And don't for one second try to make the bogus claim that deleting someone's content is not punishment.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 15:11
  • 3
    @barbecue Re: "I guess destroying useful information is the price we must pay for maintaining a pristine and perfect environment. Oh wait, we don't have that anyway." Arguments along the line of "The status quo is not perfect, so we need not try at all" are dubious at best. People find answers on SO instead of having to comb through forum threads exactly because we make the effort to organize our content in a searchable way. That includes answers posted below some question actually answering the question (or at least attempting to).
    – Baum mit Augen Mod
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 18:46
  • 2
    @barbecue Then I'm afraid I don't get what you intended to say by pointing out that SO is not pristine and perfect. It obviously isn't, so we try to improve it by moderating it. But I guess we are talking past each other here. Anyway, the point is: People find answers via google by searching their question, which leads to the same question having been asked before and then to the answer(s) attached to it. Any answer loses significant value when posted to the wrong question. If anyone has information they want to share as an answer, finding or posting a question it answers is much more helpful.
    – Baum mit Augen Mod
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 19:14
  • 3
    @BaummitAugen You said "People find answers via google by searching their question, which leads to the same question having been asked before and then to the answer(s) attached to it." This is incorrect. People search for words and phrases related to a subject, and Google returns pages that contain those words. It's trivial to prove this to yourself, simply search for a key phrase that appears in the answer but not in the question. Google returns the results anyway, even though the question is irrelevant. UNLESS the answer has been deleted that is. Mission accomplished, info destroyed.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 3:31
-4

No, do not flag the answer for deletion, as it contains useful information for OP.

Since the comment asking for clarification that the answer is responding to was from OP, the correct action is to ask OP to edit his question to include more specifically the point he was asking about in the comment.

This way the answer makes more sense.

2
  • 10
    What you suggest would likely either increase the scope of the question (hence the question would need to be closed as "lacks focus") or it would invalidate existing answers. If the OP has a new question let them ask it separately. Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 8:02
  • 5
    The new scope is already answered, no point in creating more work for everybody
    – user000001
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 8:03
-6

This seems like an incorrect statement.

The poster wrote "secondary", not "unimportant". So I think the statement is correct. You don't think it's secondary? Do you think it's primary? I think it's secondary.

How would you advise to respond?

Advise the poster to post it as a separate Q&A and to add a link to it in the comments instead.

Also, would you flag this as Not An Answer?

I would, if it doesn't attempt to answer the original question, and I had strong feelings about it.

17
  • 5
    I must disagree on the "secondary" conclusion. SO is organized the way it is to make it easy to find answers, and to eliminate the off-topic distractions along the way. How people get answers to their questions is absolutely primary. An answer that isn't an answer to the original question is absolutely out of place and should be deleted. Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 3:01
  • 4
    @MarkRansom Making it easy to find answers and deleting valid answers that are easily found as part of a related question are completely opposite goals that cannot be made compatible.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 16:38
  • 2
    @barbecue part of making it easy to find answers is making it easy to find questions. A valid question deserves to be asked as an actual question, not buried invisibly among the comments. Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 0:36
  • @MarkRansom Yes, but another part is not destroying answers that are useful.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 12, 2021 at 15:04
  • 2
    @barbecue an answer isn't useful if you can't find the question it answers. That's my whole point. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 0:43
  • 1
    @markransom First, you're wrong. You could find the question it answers easily, simply by searching for keywords used in the answer. That is to say you COULD have done so, except now that information is destroyed because the answer is gone. Second, are you genuinely claiming that NO ANSWER AT ALL is a superior situation to an answer that fails to comply with some arbitrary hierarchical organization imposed by SO? Because that's the only possible explanation I can see for your argument.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 3:15
  • 2
    And once again I've been sucked into the utterly pointless and thankless task of arguing that usefulness is more important than cosmetic appeal. Clearly it's not, since people here would rather destroy useful information than allow it to violate some arbitrary standard.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 3:19
  • 3
    @barbecue I think people would rather see the question put into shape first, or a new question created first, so that the answer actually belongs there without doubt. Much better to avoid having an orphan answer than to salvage one - which you can still do, by the way, if you feel the answer is that useful. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 5:49
  • 1
    @MisterMiyagi: Agreed it would be better if someone who wanted to write that answer had found or made somewhere better to put it, but they didn't. Once we're in the situation of having an answer to a related / followup question posted somewhere, it can be ok to leave it up. Especially if future readers of the original question are likely to have the same followup question, and especially if the "bonus answer" brings up a point some readers wouldn't have even thought to worry about / ask. (IDK if any of that is the case here, but your comment doesn't actually justify deletion.) Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 9:03
  • @PeterCordes I agree that individual cases can be well justified to preserve. But in the grand picture, where e.g. people tend to use existing content as a guideline/justification for new content, I do see point in cleaning up by default. Deleted answers aren't gone for good, if someone feels they are worth it one can still edit the question now and undelete the answer. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 10:07
  • @PeterCordes Either way, my comment was not intended to justify deletion (or not-deletion!) – it was intended to address insinuations like "people here would rather destroy useful information" or that that this is due to "some arbitrary standard". I don't think that people want to destroy information, and they don't want arbitrary standards. Yet preserving information and setting standards properly is work and I'm frankly somewhat riled that folks who do regularly volunteer their time on curation (which involves much more than just deletion) get told off like this. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 10:15
  • @MisterMiyagi: The point about setting a precedent is good, I hadn't thought about that. But the "not gone for good" argument is pretty hollow. You're not going to find it via google or SO site search. Re: curation: I think there is a valid point to be made about how to curate. A lot depends on how rare / unique the answer is. If it's something that probably already exists in a duplicate somewhere, yeah nuke it. If it might be the only good explanation of some concept on SO, cut it some slack even if it's answering a followup comment. Some future editor might make a new Q&A or nott. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 10:21
  • @PeterCordes The content creator and anyone willing to "adopt" the content – e.g. via following – can still access the content after deletion. I don't think findability via search is needed for that at all. If really no one takes interest in such an answer before it gets deleted, I honestly doubt it would be worth salvaging. Is this going to be absolutely 100% perfect? No – yet neither is having to find the few pearls in all the junk... I'd rather err on the side of content that at least adheres to the rules than on the rest. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 12:21
  • 2
    "I don't think findability via search is needed for that at all." I keep seeing these kinds of responses. They're completely at odds with how the world actually finds content on the web. People use search engines to find content. They even use search engines to find websites they are very familiar with. Everyone uses search. If it's not visible in search results, it does not exist.
    – barbecue
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 19:47
  • @barbecue This quote was not made in the context of content to consume but of content to curate. "The world" does largely not care about that. Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 19:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .