-5

A newcommer helped us on a post on SeasonnedAdvice : A strange cooker or fait-tout or... what can it be?.
Because it was is first post on StackExchange, he wasn't able to post a comment with 1 reputation point and had to post a answer to add explanations about our subject. A good post.

With a sad behavior against a newcommer someone removed his post because he should have wrote a comment instead !

How can people be so rude with newcommers ? Is it possible to restore his post in the discussion as it was ? He didn't deserve it, as he couldn't do anything than creating a new answer !

| |
  • 1
    "and had to post a response" How so? If the answer isn't an answer, it is not acceptable. A comment probably would have been. If the user doesn't have enough reputaiton to post comments, they should gain it. Sometimes moderators turn answers into comments, if these are flagged appropriately. There's no rudeness I can see, just following the policies. – πάντα ῥεῖ Aug 4 '19 at 5:54
  • The guy was the owner of the item we were discussing about and had additional information to provide about it. It was an helpful post. – Marc Aug 4 '19 at 5:56
  • In that case they clearly asked about to edit their question. OP's can always comment on their own posts BTW. – πάντα ῥεῖ Aug 4 '19 at 5:58
  • It's me, Marc, who opened the post, and Arnold the owner of the item and newcommer with one reputation point, who had this only way to provide addtionnal information. – Marc Aug 4 '19 at 5:59
  • OK, if they (Arnold) have to provide additional information they also could have proposed an edit to your post to add this. – πάντα ῥεῖ Aug 4 '19 at 6:02
  • You can edit a post with 1 reputation point ? No. It requires nearly 100. – Marc Aug 4 '19 at 6:05
  • 4
    No, you can suggest an edit without even an account. It requires review but, as the owner of the question, you can approve it on your own. – Catija Aug 4 '19 at 6:06
  • This is specific to the Cooking site so I've moved it to their child meta rather than the Meta Stack Exchange. This makes it more likely that the moderators here on Cooking will see your question. – Catija Aug 4 '19 at 6:09
  • No it's about a general behavior of people using stackexchange. Reset this discussion we are on to meta please. – Marc Aug 4 '19 at 6:11
  • Hello !! I am a newcommer and before using stackexchange, I have to figure myself that I have to read this post meta.stackexchange.com/questions/214173/… first !!!!. It will come to my mind by itself : discussion n°214173, of course. Are you kidding ? Can't you make things more complicated ? Shouldn't a newcommer read also the discussions 245127, 124953 and 348122 before any post ? – Marc Aug 4 '19 at 6:15
  • 1
    If you want to discuss the reputation limit for comments, yeah, I suppose that'd go on the network-wide meta - but I don't really think that it's going to be a new question after this many years, so you might want to go search for other discussion there first. This specific question, though, is very clearly about a specific situation on cooking, so it belongs here. – Cascabel Aug 4 '19 at 6:18
  • @Cascabel No it's a problem about comprehensive behavior expected with newcommers. – Marc Aug 4 '19 at 6:19
  • 1
    No, it's not. You're taking a specific situation (some of the details of which aren't accurately described here), and extrapolating to something general. That's a pretty big leap; the only material thing here is the specific situation. – Cascabel Aug 4 '19 at 6:20
  • 1
7

I am certain there was no malice in this action. I know the moderators on this site well and they have always acted in the best interest of the participants here.

It is true that we prevent users with under 50 reputation from commenting, leaving them little choice but to write answers. Fortunately, our moderators have an option to convert an answer into a comment, which is what was done here. The information was retained, as far as I can tell.

The problem with having this supporting information in an answer is that no one will see it! If you truly want to solve your mystery, we need all of the information visible in the question! If you are working together as a group and each have pieces of the info, the best way to include all of it is to edit it into the question, not to add it in an answer or as a comment. This can be done either by you directly or by Arnold suggesting an edit and you approving it.

I'm sorry for any confusion and I hope Arnold understands that no insult was meant. This was an expedient action taken to help improve the quality of the question. Good luck in your quest!

| |
4

The answer wasn't "destroyed". It was converted into a comment on the question, which is appropriate: it was trying to clarify the question, not provide an answer. You're welcome to go one step further and edit that information into the question, so it's even more obvious to readers.

I suspect the author would've posted it as a comment in the first place if they could have - but as you yourself pointed out in comments on that very answer, they didn't have the reputation to do so. They could also have suggested an edit to your question, which doesn't require reputation or even an account.

We're aware that the structure of the site isn't always obvious to newcomers, but we did the best we could within that structure here, and I think things have ended up all right - the information this user wanted to provide is still there, right below your question.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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