24

I was reading the answers on this question today and found a few of them to be rather full of noisy ego battles. There may however be a couple bits of useful information amidst the combat. It's a popular enough question that I think it should be cleaned up but feeling a bit unsure about editing out something which the community finds valuable, since I tend to assumed someone else would have done so by now.

On the other hand, I find the back and forths there inappropriate. Can I get some advice please regarding edits this specific question and scenarios like this going forward?

4
  • 4
    Wow, those answers are a bit of a mess. Removing the sniping and just leaving the responses below relevant quotes with attribution would make them more clear and less noisy.
    – davidism
    Jun 22, 2016 at 2:09
  • 1
    The site explicitly disallows using answers to address the user who posted the question; I don't see any reason why addressing other users who posted answers should be treated any differently. Deleting the text addressing specific users from the answers would be appropriate.
    – BSMP
    Jun 22, 2016 at 2:25
  • 2
    Well, do pay attention to the date. These posts were from back in 2008, before the comment feature was introduced. So it's not like these people are just stupid, egotistical maniacs. They were doing what you were supposed to do back then, editing your responses to others into your post. Jun 22, 2016 at 14:13
  • 2
    @CodyGray I wouldn't say what they were 'supposed' to do; as the idea was not to have discussions (hence why it's a Q&A); but they did it because they wanted to have cross talk. Hence why comments were introduced. Jun 22, 2016 at 14:27

1 Answer 1

25

I've taken a pass at editing the answers to take out the cross talk and make sure it was included in the answer itself (if anywhere). You're right, that question and its answers were a mess.

In the future feel free to suggest edits or to get on a chatroom and ask for advice on how to edit; but since you have edit privileges you should feel free to edit that stuff out.

1
  • 7
    thanks for making those edits. seeing what you did gives me better picture of how to address stuff like this in the future. Jun 22, 2016 at 4:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/326627/cleaning-up-noise-from-answers/326629
meta.stackoverflow.com
CC-MAIN-2023-23
109296
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:UII7I5O2FLXJG7KJMM74IVV7SIQSCUGF
<urn:uuid:0da5c3fd-c973-409b-a693-a24782129ee2>
2023-06-05T14:35:50Z
151.101.129.69
text/html
sha1:4K6C54CVKNWZFJHDIO4NB6IBILWA3IT4
<urn:uuid:125db290-67b3-49b9-84dc-7ccef457e91b>
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/326627/cleaning-up-noise-from-answers/326629
response
<urn:uuid:9da01c69-7df1-4c27-aab3-61f0a1d3407c>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2023-23
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May/June 2023
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-140
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-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/