## Example situation<sup>1</sup>

We have a user that finds a question and posts an answer for each and every change they would make - commonly being a single low-hanging fruit point, but not limited to it. It leads to answers that, in all, sum to a couple of sentences of value per answer. The answerer also posted a significant number of answers - enough for a full day's worth of HNQ exposure.

This can lead to a lot of "fluff" / unnecessary information - just repeats of the user ID, edit buttons, comment sections, paragraphs between answers, etc. This makes what could be half a page of answers span a couple of pages.

---

To me it just feels off. To simplify the following questions I'll refer to this as 'flooding'. And so I have the following questions:

- Is 'flooding' allowed?

 If it is allowed:

 - What effects do you think allowing 'flooding' would have on answer quality?

 <br>

 If it's not allowed:

 - At what point does answering become 'flooding'?
 - How should we deal with 'flooding'?
 - Should users post a [frequently posted comment][1]? If so, what and where?

---

<sup>1</sup> This question was sparked by a [specific example][0], however the situation isn't limited to it.

 [0]: https://codereview.stackexchange.com/q/174263
 [1]: https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4952