4

I know our moderators are busy folks and I really don't want to make unnecessary work for them, so I would like some clarification regarding the "not constructive" comment flag.

I recently flagged two comments as not constructive on this answer that were declined.

They read:

imho this is too much complicated

and

This answer is the correct solution. And it is not too complicated

Perhaps I've missed something, but I don't see any value in either of these comments. Should I stop flagging these types of comments? Are they constructive?


To address some points made in the existing answers, I would like to add the following:

The help center reads in part with regard to when someone should comment:

Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post

I don't see how either comment guides the author in improving the post. To put myself in the author's shoes, if someone left a comment to the effect of "This is invalid/inefficient", I would likely think to myself, "Ok, where/how?" There is no guidance in any either of these comments.

Further in the help center, under when someone should not comment:

Compliments which do not add new information ("+1, great answer!")

and

Criticisms which do not add anything constructive ("-1, see previous comments you scallywag!");

The first comment I view as a criticism which does not add anything constructive

The second, to me, is clearly a compliment that does not add new information.

Have I gone wrong somewhere in my interpretation of the help center?

12

In my opinion the comments are constructive.

They are criticizing the validity and the efficiency of the answer, which is entirely appropriate for a comment.

5
  • 4
    I can see your point. However, I believe "This is invalid/inefficient" isn't necessary constructive unless it provides an explanation: "This is invalid/inefficient because..." – That1Guy Jul 15 '16 at 19:37
  • 1
    @That1Guy: Sure, an explanation would be nice. But even like they are, they say something about the answer, so deleting them doesn't seem appropriate. That's just my opinion, though. We will see if any moderator adds an official response. – user000001 Jul 15 '16 at 19:39
  • 3
    @That1Guy Surely you've seen people create ridiculously circuitous and mind-blowingly complicated solutions to simple problems. You're right to say that they should explain -but sometimes, it's pointless. It's like pointing out that a Sherman tank is fuel inefficient, then being asked to explain why. ... it's a tank. – Athena Jul 15 '16 at 21:57
  • @Ares I agree with you. But in your example, which part is more ridiculous? Asking why a tank is fuel inefficient or pointing it out in the first place? Personally, I would say pointing out a tank's fuel inefficiency isn't very constructive to begin with. – That1Guy Jul 15 '16 at 22:05
  • I think it has a use, as we can see from the comment upvotes. It creates a platform for people to echo a thought that's likely to be common to people. If you look at really terrible questions, you'll see they get downvoted, but the general, questionably constructive comment that points out why, even in general terms- gets upvoted. Of all the noisy, pointless questions, answers and comments people leave, I think these are pretty harmless. To be truly unconstructive they would have to omit even that- it has to just amount to 'you're bad and you should feel bad.' – Athena Jul 15 '16 at 22:10
11

Isn't it ironic? On Meta, we see people asking to require a comment when you downvote every single day, and now there's a comment which could specify a possible reason for downvoting*, and somebody is asking to remove it!

Joking, and Alanis Morissette, aside, I think you asked a valid question. According to the help center, you should comment when you want to

Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post

Are the comments you mention really constructive? Given the fact that there are other (less complicated) answers, I think so. They do provide additional guidance to readers with the same problem in choosing the best answer.

*: I don't intend to imply that the commenter actually did downvote the question.

2
0

Most of the time, these comments point out something very obvious. This would make them fall under "does not add anything constructive/new"

I often see the same type of comment on one-liners:

This is really simple!

Really? Did it require any special knowledge to determine that? Usually, the answer is no. You can tell it's simple because there is very little code.

I have flagged these types of comments in the past (usually, if not always, on old, popular answers) and it was marked as helpful every time. I can't explain why you got declined, but it could be a mistake or maybe things weren't as obvious.


Please note that this is different than comments about the efficiency of an answer. Determining how efficient code is requires both specialized knowledge/experience and usually testing.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/328023/are-opinion-based-comments-regarding-the-complexity-of-an-answer-constructive/328026
meta.stackoverflow.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-21
159193
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:BSBG7V45EHHY6ARZHQF6D4YTIIHQSLZA
<urn:uuid:d1ba4de7-b294-4363-8d56-66d6d2bd99b1>
2021-05-06T01:54:22Z
151.101.1.69
text/html
sha1:FQRJN2MWGAFTK25CAHYWIAJNGD77GCWC
<urn:uuid:31a479c1-ca46-4a8b-b61f-23927dd58d92>
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/328023/are-opinion-based-comments-regarding-the-complexity-of-an-answer-constructive/328026
response
<urn:uuid:5591f859-dd97-40fe-aad1-9527328ea8c1>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-21
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-50.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/