Return to Question

It's worth mentioning that we have actually discussed this once before, to the conclusion that we shouldn't be judging whether these answers are really answers, and should downvote them for being low-quality instead.

It's worth mentioning that we have actually discussed this once before, to the conclusion that we shouldn't be judging whether these answers are really answers, and should downvote them for being low-quality instead.

• I believe we can now create objective criterion which we can use to categorize action on answers
• I think these criterion cover a smaller, more actionable subset of the problematic answers from our first discussion
• I believe the prevalence of our questions on the Hot Questions list, and simply that our site is growing, is exacerbating this problem
• I firmly believe that, at some point, while there is onus on the asker to foolproof their question, this only goes so far, and it's not really the OP's job to predict all the poor answers that may come in - it may not be reasonably possible, either.

Still, the previous discussion is worth reading over. If we create criterion, they must be as specific as possible, and must be as objective as possible.

• I believe we can now create objective criteria which we can use to categorize action on answers
• I think these criteria cover a smaller, more actionable subset of the problematic answers from our first discussion
• I believe the prevalence of our questions on the Hot Questions list, and simply that our site is growing, is exacerbating this problem
• I firmly believe that, at some point, while there is onus on the asker to foolproof their question, this only goes so far, and it's not really the OP's job to predict all the poor answers that may come in - it may not be reasonably possible, either.

Still, the previous discussion is worth reading over. If we create criteria, they must be as specific as possible, and must be as objective as possible.