Timeline for What are the grounds to accept an answer?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2017 at 7:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://seasonedadvice.com/ with https://cooking.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 20, 2010 at 20:02 | comment | added | Aaronut Mod | I would also very much like to see what you think is an example of a good question that does not have verifiable answers, seeing as how that very criteria has started to entrench itself across the network and even within the core team as an important criteria for determining whether or not a question is too subjective (i.e. merely a poll). "Can people back their answers up?" or more explicitly "How will I identify right/wrong/good/bad answers?" is exactly the question one needs to be asking oneself before actually submitting a question. | |
| Oct 20, 2010 at 19:56 | comment | added | Aaronut Mod | Speaking of misinterpretation, does my post begin or not begin with the words "My personal feeling on this is..."? | |
| Oct 20, 2010 at 19:17 | comment | added | hobodave Mod | In short, my problem with your answer is primarily its advocatory nature. If you wish to use those guidelines for acceptance, that's fine, and I won't fault you for it. Yet, given that these discussions do end up being pseudo-policy in a way, I do not want to enforce, encourage, suggest, or "should" anyone into voting/accepting beyond what is in the FAQ. | |
| Oct 20, 2010 at 19:06 | comment | added | hobodave Mod | You misinterpret and misrepresent my statements. I am not advocating that anyone should do anything besides accept answers on their own personal preference. My statement was simply that there is no harm in an accepted answer turning out to be wrong; the sky will not fall. The other point I make is my wholehearted disagreement that users should only accept answers that are personally verifiable, and should not even ask questions that cannot be personally verifiable. I take great pains to be very specific with my words, please interpret my statements as written. | |
| Oct 20, 2010 at 18:59 | comment | added | Aaronut Mod | Trustworthy reference are fine (if you actually trust the references), but in the second part of your answer, the rationale seems to be that you should accept potentially wrong answers on an entirely subjective basis simply because professionals are prone to doing it too. That's essentially the is-ought problem right there and I'm very much against that way of thinking. We shouldn't mimic actions we know are negative simply because they were performed by someone we usually trust. | |
| Oct 20, 2010 at 17:34 | history | edited | hobodaveMod | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 284 characters in body
|
| Oct 20, 2010 at 17:27 | history | answered | hobodaveMod | CC BY-SA 2.5 |