Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Comments on Accepted Answer?

Parent

Accepted Answer?

+2
−0

In SomeOther systems, there is an easy way to mark an Answer as the "accepted answer". I don't see an obvious way to do that here. Is there a way? If not, should there be?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+2
−0

We need to flesh this out, but the idea I have in my head, and that I recall discussing on the forum thread (which I haven't gone back and reread yet), is that in addition to votes we'll allow people to add reactions like "this worked" (and maybe a few others TBD). These would be public, unlike votes, would be displayed with the answer, and would have no other effect. The asker is free to indicate that more than one answer worked; people who aren't the asker are free to signal that something worked for them. We're not aiming for this in the "1.0" (MVP) release, but it's something we want to look at after.

The same mechanism would allow experts (or people who claim to be experts) to indicate "this is dangerous", at the cost of having to own that. That's not likely to come up on Writing but could come up on a Chemistry site, for example.

These reactions would be purely informative, and it's up to the reader to evaluate them including considering who left them. I wouldn't want to automatically enable them on sites that don't benefit from them, but it's a possibility for later.

But, to go back to Mark's point, the original asker of the question doesn't get special status here, and certainly we don't want to grant one person the ability to change the sort order. The whole point of community voting is community assessment.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (4 comments)
General comments
Mark Baker‭ wrote over 4 years ago

This sounds a lot like the various types of reactions that you can make to a Facebook post. The difference being that on Facebook they don't accumulate to an reputation or other form of trust mechanism. But why shouldn't they, in principle? Getting a lot of "that worked" votes, for instance, might mean more, or mean something different, than getting a lot of "I agree" votes, for instance.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 4 years ago · edited over 4 years ago

@Mark that's an idea worth exploring. Better to not count them and then decide to (if it's compatible with how they're being used) than do it and then take it away (which could frustrate people). Once we get there at all, I could see experimenting with ways to use that data. Since it would already be configurable per-site, we could experiment on one site without disrupting any others. (Meta, for example...)

Canina‭ wrote over 4 years ago

I like the idea of being able to indicate (in a standardized form) why one thinks that (particularly) an answer is good or bad. This would be one way to do that. It would do much the same thing as comments associated with votes, but aggregate more easily.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 4 years ago

@aCVn yes, it's the aggregation that makes the idea attractive to me. You can see at a glance what the overall reaction is, and if you want to read the comments you might learn more but you don't have to.