Timeline for Is there a limit to the number of answers a user can post to one single question?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 22, 2017 at 10:45 | vote | accept | PeilonrayzMod | ||
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:47 | comment | added | ben rudgers | @Mat'sMug My opinion is that it does not require moderation. Your opinion is that it does. It's entirely your choice to spend energy moderating on this issue. It's not why I voted for you. It's not enough to make me vote against you. If you don't like being a moderator, don't keep doing it for my sake. Good luck. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:38 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @benrudgers if posting 3+ answers on one question isn't obnoxious behavior that's obviously opening the door to vote-farming to you, then good for you and you can run for moderator when it becomes community consensus and I step down for not wanting to put up with this crap. FWIW it's completely unfair to the users that do make the effort of properly formatting their own legit, multi-point answers. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:34 | comment | added | ben rudgers | I believe we all agree that posting 3, 4, 5, 6 or more answers on a single question is abusive. It is true you believe that. The content of the belief is false due to the content of my belief. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:26 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @benrudgers if a non-native English user can write up 5 answers on one question, then they can write up 5 line-separated points in one answer, and the system will generate an auto-flag after 20 comments. With 5 answers the system will generate 5 auto-flags after 100 comments. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:25 | comment | added | ben rudgers | What is normal on StackOverflow today, is not what was normal a few years ago. Sites evolve. Moderation that assumes long literary answers as the norm is a barrier to non-native English users. There are established methods of dealing with flooding. There is nothing 'conversational' in the case in question here. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:14 | history | edited | Mathieu GuindonMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 1068 characters in body |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 18:07 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @Peilonrayz I don't think "flooding" should be allowed; the line is drawn when multiple answers can be combined into one given proper formatting, and IMO if community consensus is that "flooding" shouldn't be allowed, then the standard moderation rules apply, from mod-message warning to account suspension - so yeah, custom-flag is appropriate. I'm tempted to ask a similar question on MSE to see what the point of view is of the SE community as a whole. But I'm just a moderator, I don't get to decide what the rules are, I'm just here to enforce them. I think non-diamond users should decide that. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 17:59 | comment | added | Peilonrayz Mod | Would you be willing to answer a couple of my questions above - if you think they are relevant? I asked them so non-diamond 'moderators' can help ease moderation. I for example don't know what avenue I should use to help moderation if I come across something like this again - chat; flags on question, or answers; meta; or comments on answer, or answers. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 17:55 | comment | added | Der Kommissar | Totally agree - just don't want anyone getting their hopes up that this will happen anytime soon. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 17:22 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @EBrown regardless, my point holds: don't split up answers just because SE didn't implement anchor headings as of yet. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 17:21 | comment | added | Der Kommissar | That may be true, but based on the history of SE, I really don't expect this to ever be implemented. I think we can hope and dream all we want, but let's face it: this isn't important enough to warrant building their own spec that might change. We won't see it until it's standardized because SE doesn't want to have to make a change of it later. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 17:03 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @EBrown FWIW that's no moderator - he's a Community Manager =) | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 17:03 | comment | added | Der Kommissar | Apparently Jon Ericson would like to see this happen as well. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 16:26 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | That's 7 years and 7 months old. I think it needs a refresher. @EBrown I just put up a +100 bounty on it. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 16:13 | comment | added | Der Kommissar | That depends on how they generate it I guess - I would see #[...](...) being a problem as that may also be indicating a regular hyperlink. Either way, there's a feature-request on big-Meta for exactly this that's not status-tagged. Wonder if it should be refreshed with the new sunset of Documentation? | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 16:08 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @EBrown IDK, but GitHub seems to have no problem with Markdown generating hash-links for ## Headings. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 15:59 | comment | added | Der Kommissar | On second thought - that wouldn't work unless a Regex was used to ensure that some-anchor-text was not a link elsewhere. Maybe #[Plain Text Title as Normal](#some-anchor-text) where the # in the parenthesis is the magic test. Might work more effectively. Probably wasn't done yet because Documentation was supposed to solve that. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 15:54 | comment | added | Mathieu Guindon Mod | @EBrown yes, that's exactly what I'm suggesting =) | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 15:54 | comment | added | Der Kommissar | Would be nice if we could have #[Plain Text Title as normal](some-anchor-text) render the H1 (or whatever) as an anchored header with a #name that is linkable. (But that's a feature request for SE.) | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 15:50 | history | answered | Mathieu GuindonMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |