Hot answers tagged

22

The second option is more useful. Sometimes "Replace the hardware" is the correct answer. To make it even more helpful, add information that lead you to test this angle.


16

Remember, the answer you provide today is not just for the OP. It is for everyone else who happens to land on it via some search engine link or other method in the future. Adding an explanation like you did here improves the answer considerably and makes it more useful to the OP and anyone else who might subsequently find it. It explains what caused the ...


13

The text says to include the essential parts of the answer. If the author of the answer does that and only that, it would fall under the fair use doctrine - see the U.S. Copyright Office's information on Fair Use. But if the author, as you say, copies and pastes a large portion of copyrighted text, presenting it as their own, that would be both legally and ...


8

As the moderator concerned, not that it really matters, but at the time I was not yet elected. Second I made that edit when that answer popped up in First Posts review queue where one only sees such an answer in isolation. As a matter of routine I improved the formatting some and removed what appeared a typical first time user trying to sign an answer ...


7

It appears that a moderator missed the fact that this post was a copy of another answer, with "Thanks" appended. I won't speak for him, but I will say that in response to some flags I deleted the non-answer several days ago.


5

You yourself can't. But moderators can. You should be able to flag your own question for moderator attention: in need of moderator intervention A problem not listed above that requires action by a moderator. Be specific and detailed! Please be aware that questions older than 30 days can't be migrated and we'll not always honour such requests ...


5

Just for completeness, I declined both of these flags because: In both cases, the answers could easily be improved by editing them, and this is not something you need a moderator for. Also they stand well enough on their own, that even if the links went dead they would still be useful. Iain has covered these points pretty well, so I won't belabor them.


5

If you see a post that has been edited, if you click on the "Edited [Date]" link you will see a list of post revisions. I'll use your question here as an example. If you click on the link as shown in the red box: You can see (in red) what was taken out and (in green) what was added. For more info, have a look at this FaQ entry, "How Does Editing Work?"


5

First off: Flagging link only answers is the correct thing to do. You may also edit the answer if you're so inclined. Second opinions can differ but in this specific Q & A I would most likely have declined the flag too, because : The answer is 5 years old Not every old Q & A is worth judging to current standards. The answer is Accepted by the ...


5

First off, these are really old question and answers, which makes inertia important (It is not useful to pick through everything in our history for stuff that no longer fits with our current viewpoints). Regardless, the first answer does have another answer than the links it posts: The questions you're asking are answered in the hier(7) man page. Read ...


4

Since others have told you about the edit history, I will speak about editing in general. I wouldn't worry too much about this, (most) people don't edit posts to stick a finger at you but to make the site more readable for everyone. This is important because StackExchange is not meant as a short-lived forum, but we try to create a body of information that ...


3

This is called "The Fastest Gun In The West" and was discussed on meta.stackoverflow about 2 years ago I think. Answers used to default by sorting by votes > age. Now they sort by votes > random. This means that in the beginning, when there are 0 votes, no one answer floats to the top, because the top answer tends to get an un-even (and often un-deserved) ...


3

While there is some merit to the idea on a really fast moving site like SO, here on SF we're slow enough that for most questions the long tail pays better than the immediate post. There are questions here where there will be three answers on it within two minutes of posting, which is the exact case you're talking about here. However, in my experience these ...


3

Both of those answers are valid and will remain valid even if the links go dead, all someone has to do is go looking based on the information provided. They are absolutely answers and should not have been flagged NAA. There are lost of things you could have done with out flagging ... You could have gone looking and found an online version of the hier(7) ...


2

If you click on the date of an edit, it will take you to a page with the whole revision-history of the question: Leads to this: https://serverfault.com/posts/342172/revisions


1

One of those did show up as a low quality review. I voted Looks OK, because the question asked where an explanation can be found and the proper answer to that question is a link. And I don't know any better answer to that question, than the first of the two links provided.


1

I think this already exists. If your posts has been edited then you will see a notification to that effect. If you click on the date of the edit then you will be taken to the /revisions page for the post in question in this case https://serverfault.com/posts/347886/revisions which shows additions in green and removals in red.


1

It's been proposed any number of times to allow moderators to accept an answer on behalf of a user. This has also been shot down the same number of times. The rationale is that accepting an answer is meant to indicate which answer was most useful to the person asking the question, while community consensus as to the "best" answer is expressed through votes. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
https://meta.serverfault.com/tags/answers/hot
meta.serverfault.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2020-10
128424
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:LX3TXVD2OPCUZ4M6S3EYPG5VAXAICWH4
<urn:uuid:e529ad77-1781-420e-b4e8-1f98967b73cf>
2020-02-29T04:39:20Z
151.101.193.69
text/html
sha1:AO3S6L62354DPMT3XPM4J42WVJH7NBUZ
<urn:uuid:4b4406a1-a06e-48e9-8f87-e1ac28bab3da>
https://meta.serverfault.com/tags/answers/hot
response
<urn:uuid:cc4f1f69-4d9d-4714-891d-3eb8e8bd3b57>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2020-10
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for February 2020
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-170.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/