27

There is nothing wrong about it. It is perfectly ok to answer your own question, the system even allows it and changes the name of "answer" button to "Answer your own question". This was done in the past by many users, even high-reputation users did start their own question and answered them, e.g. @amoeba in here. Usually you ask a question if you want to ...


24

Sure. Just quote them and give the source: john.doe@example.com answered my question in a private e-mail, I'm posting his answer below: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut ...


20

This is a series of side-notes to @Glen_b's excellent answer. Editing is a public service. Even some small edits can just clean up a post and make it easier for everyone to read, which is a positive contribution. Often an edit can change a question that looks too messy to wade through to one that looks readable. Editing can and should help the OP, who should ...


18

The basic policy is clear enough -- don't answer in comments, answer in answers. Some SE sites are very strict and simply remove anything in comments that looks like an answer. Others run a bit looser. If someone does answer in comments and you expand it into an answer, then as long as you give credit where you rely substantially on someone else's text, ...


16

That's a good, if perhaps risky, use of your hard-earned reputation: it presumes the bounty will actually result in the kinds of answers you seek. As alternatives (or supplements) to this strategy you might consider (a) posting your own answers; (b) rewarding existing answers of the type you wish to encourage; (c) promoting selected questions or answers in ...


15

Yes, you should flag such contributions. You shouldn't necessarily flag them as "rude / abusive", unless that's actually the case, but you can still flag. For example, comments can be flagged as "no longer needed" (the fact that they may never have been relevant does not negate this). You can also flag and leave a custom comment. We get that sometimes ...


15

For reasons I hope are obvious, (1) these "simple checks, heuristics or algorithms" are in place and (2) their details--even their nature--are not publicized. When you think you have been a victim of "revenge" or "serial" downvoting, please do not post the usual "why the downvote?" comments. Instead, flag one of the downvoted posts and use the "Custom" ...


14

[Just to make clear, though my answers should always be read this way: this is personal opinion] You don't need to have any intention of answering a question to edit it. the difficulties facing the initial user may not be as conspicuous because the editor may have inadvertently filled in some critical conceptual gaps in the OP. Where feasible, it's ...


12

You're mixing questions. Are repeated bounties against any rules? Apparently not. Your reputation is yours, to gamble away if you think it's worth the risk. Is offering them regarded as poor behaviour? I haven't detected any feeling against repeated bounties, but then they seem to be rare. Would a second bounty work? An optimist would argue that you ...


12

I'm sorry for any new user who has been discouraged in genuine attempts to ask a question. I agree there's a problem with what appears to be an amount of fairly indiscriminate downvoting. If you're posting the best question you can - and try to act on any feedback you do get - I'd encourage you to avoid deleting your questions (at least if they only get a ...


12

The code in the question was this: df = data_frame(group = as.factor(rep(1:5, each=100)), x = rep(seq(-3,3, length.out =100), 5), y=as.numeric(dnorm(x, mean=means[group]) > 0.4*runif(10))) In your answer you adapted it to df <- data.frame(group = as.factor(rep(1:5, each=100)), x = rep(seq(-3,3, length....


11

We're all of us obtuse from time, so assuming good faith & engaging in an honest attempt to find out what precisely the commenter thinks is the issue will almost always be the best option. If they don't want to elaborate, consider flagging their comment as "no longer needed"—the flip-side to comments' not being down-votable is that the bar for ...


9

Interesting and important question. I don't want to add specifically to what I and more crucially many others have said on voting here. There are many such threads. We're not long out of Ganging up with downvotes. How can we discourage mob behaviour? I hope it is fair to say that almost none of the participants in that thread are likely to feel that it went ...


9

I'm not sure that your question deserves two downvotes. Your question is from a course or textbook, so it qualifies as 'homework' for our purposes. You should add the [self-study] tag & read its wiki. That said, you certainly don't hide that fact, and aren't just after the answer / someone to do your homework for you. You do tell us what you ...


9

One clear principle has consistently helped me moderate such situations: If your intended changes affect only your work, feel free to make them. Indeed, we encourage you to do so. But if they might affect the contributions of others, then be careful! By "contributions of others" I mean principally answers that may have been posted in the thread, but I ...


9

Do not re-tag more than 5 old threads at a time.


8

I think you'd be well advised to look through discussions on SE Meta. I have bumped into numerous discussions which raise the issues you raise and others linked; I have never searched for more. But the bottom lines appear to be three-fold: Some changes in reputation are automated, driven by automated attempts to spot unacceptable behaviour. If someone ...


8

Ok to vote down newbies? Yes: when they don't show any research effort, are unclear, or not useful. Evidencing confusion about concepts† or making incorrect assertions shouldn't in themselves be considered reasons for down-voting a question. It's wise to presume that new users are unfamilar with site norms, inexperienced in asking statistical ...


8

I generally agree with @Tim's answer, but I'd like to make a few other points. 1) As noted by @amoeba, consent is really important. I can't emphasize this enough. I have tons of opinions about statistics that aren't well developed enough to be taught to the world / are probably wrong. I'd hate for someone to take some of my opinions and present them as ...


8

Abdu, I was one of the original downvoters, because I believed that your question was posed poorly (and as I commented, the title not reflecting the question bothered me). I undid the downvote after the editing both by you and by @gung addressed this. Reflecting on this, I may have reacted too quickly by downvoting; giving you the chance to edit first would ...


8

Here's a bump to this thread: Codidact now has a Math.Codidact site, with scope General Q&A about all branches of theoretical and applied mathematics, including closely-adjacent sciences where the central question is about the math. This seems to have a certain overlap with CrossValidated, though a lot of our content here would apparently be off-topic ...


7

What about this possibility? You could leave a comment about the scope of topics on this site, mention your suggested destination and then suggest that the OP flag it to migrate rather than repost (whether you also flag it yourself is up to you) . However, it's a good idea before suggesting a post belongs on another SE site to make sure it fits with the on-...


7

The reason why "thanks" and other salutations are edited is to remove noise from questions/answers, so readers can know what posts are about more easily. The following posts have complementary information: Should 'Hi', 'thanks', taglines, and salutations be removed from posts? (main Meta SE site). What's the site policy on removing ...


7

I agree that it is better to provide an answer for otherwise unanswered questions. In general, if there is an answer in the comments that is substantively the same as the answer I would have otherwise given, I just go ahead and give my version despite the fact that it already exists from someone else. They had the opportunity to convert their comments ...


7

There is no limit. If you have the energy to re-tag 500 threads in one sitting, then thank you & Godspeed.


6

You may be worrying more than you need. I think it's within the rules of the site to ping absolutely anyone -- but not everyone would see the ping. However what's within the rules is not always the same as what people might see as reasonable. I think it would generally be reasonable to: a) ping a user that you have a specific reason to contact (like an ...


6

Merely discussing more than one method doesn't really justify posting a separate answer for each, especially as a great answer would compare & contrast them. There isn't usually much sense in seeing votes as measuring the relative popularity of different methods. As an example see https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/68917/17230. The compare & contrast ...


6

Create a general landing page for statistics questions. We could create a statistics landing page where all sites, for instance also datascience.SE, could join together in a single same spot. This is a bit more complicated than a simple idea of collaboration, and takes time to develop. This idea is that we should be able to do like 'big data' and gather ...


5

Encouraging (pressuring - yes, it can be viewed as such) users to accept an Answer has been outlawed on StackOverflow for good reason. It is up to individual users whether they want to accept an answer or not. If they don't want to, that is up to them. For example, the accept rate is now not displayed for a user in the Q&A to stop people berating users ...


5

I am so glad @SextusEmpiricus asked this question, and I have been visiting both sites before this question was posted. That said: Top Answers' Code of Conduct is "Be nice." which seems ripe for abuse, and ripe for implicit biases to manifest. If Codidact has a Code of Conduct, it is not immediately visible. For all SO/SE's execrably poor decision making ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible