21
$\begingroup$

Maybe it’s just me, however, there are some questions where there exist much better answers somewhere which are not the accepted one. I understand that for an answer to be accepted, it just need to "work for the proponent of the question".

Nonetheless, a recurrent pattern seems to happen. Many of those answers seem to be chosen as accepted by new users (it happened to me for example). It is also common to see questions with a single answer accepted in less than 24 hours following the same pattern.

I understand that coming from outside, never using this site; it may be tempting to accept the first person who was “nice enough” to answer us or just because of confirmation bias.

So, my question is: Why not giving new users at least 24 hours before they can accept any answer, considering that this is the time frame that most answers occur?

$\endgroup$
15
  • $\begingroup$ @ACuriousMind. Yep. That was my question. Something similar to what happen when we start a bounty and try to award the prize in less than 48 hours. In this case, you receive a reminder notifying you that you must wait for a certain time to able to do that. $\endgroup$
    – J. Manuel
    Commented Nov 24, 2017 at 12:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This meta question seems to belong to the mother meta site as Phys.SE cannot make such changes to the SE engine. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic Mod
    Commented Nov 24, 2017 at 17:14
  • $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic. I think you’re right. Actually I’ve been thinking on this 30 seconds after posting the question. Unfortunately I don’t know How to move it to the main SE-meta page. $\endgroup$
    – J. Manuel
    Commented Nov 24, 2017 at 19:18
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Well, the SE team does monitor "child metas" for feature requests. So I don't think this necessarily needs to be sent to the mother meta. But if you really do want it sent there, you can either delete it here and repost it there, or a moderator can migrate it for you. $\endgroup$
    – David Z Mod
    Commented Nov 24, 2017 at 23:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I have answers that have been upvoted in less time than it takes to read the entire post. This bad habit is kinda annoying actually. So nevermind newbies: many users should take a long and deep breath before voting. $\endgroup$
    – ZeroTheHero
    Commented Nov 25, 2017 at 3:10
  • $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero Reading speed can differ quite a lot from one person to another, and some can read really fast (I usually read quite fast). $\endgroup$
    – Massimo Ortolano
    Commented Nov 25, 2017 at 15:27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero regarding fast upvotes, I feel another explanation is that half the answer (or the general principles) may already be known to the user, but reading an answer may provide the missing link, or it's purely an instinctive response to learning something new. I feel that you deserve an explanation if you meant your answer to: physics.stackexchange.com/q/370645 which I think I u/v, pretty much hot off the press. (Although maybe you don't mean that question). Anyway, we can each sleep more soundly now, hopefully. $\endgroup$
    – user176049
    Commented Nov 25, 2017 at 16:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero Sometimes, I will read an answer and the first few words/paragraph is exactly what I was thinking a good answer would look like. Sometimes I vote it up while I keep reading. If for some reason the answer breaks down halfway and turns to crap, I retract my vote before it goes through. If an answer looks incredibly long I usually don't though; because then there's a chance I can't retract the vote by the time I'm done. It's not a great habit; but I've found myself forgetting to upvote good posts otherwise. $\endgroup$
    – JMac
    Commented Nov 26, 2017 at 14:52
  • $\begingroup$ I thing users do come back in the first 24 hours. The thing is (if nobody noticed before ;-), the number of answers grow fast, causing an expectation of what is next for new users. $\endgroup$
    – J. Manuel
    Commented Nov 27, 2017 at 6:24
  • $\begingroup$ @tparker I would bet the users you allude to are highly likely to do no diligence. I agree that, for these impatient white rabbits, 24hrs would likely bring about the “abandon without upvote” syndrome. $\endgroup$
    – ZeroTheHero
    Commented Nov 28, 2017 at 2:22
  • $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero: I have sometimes upvoted answers in less time than it takes to read them, and I am fairly sure I've done this to at least one of your answers. The reason for this is that I started to post an answer of my own and then quickly realized that you (or someone else) had already posted exactly what I was going to say. It does not always take a careful reading to determine this. In that case, I generally upvote instead of posting a duplicate answer. $\endgroup$
    – WillO
    Commented Nov 28, 2017 at 16:09
  • $\begingroup$ @WillO I’m thankful for your confidence but unfortunately I submit you should always read my answers in full, if only to point out the not-so-occasional gobbledygook that I can produce. $\endgroup$
    – ZeroTheHero
    Commented Nov 29, 2017 at 0:02
  • $\begingroup$ @DawoodibnKareem Insightful! Never thought about it this way. In StackOverflow one can test the answer and check whether it worked for him or not. This is not the case in Physics.SE most of the times. $\endgroup$
    – J. Manuel
    Commented Dec 3, 2017 at 10:40
  • $\begingroup$ @DawoodibnKareem - "This answer works for me" often translates to "Now I understand." $\endgroup$
    – mmesser314
    Commented Dec 4, 2017 at 3:57
  • $\begingroup$ @DawoodibnKareem - I think this is really a good point, and it deserves an independent question itself here in Meta. $\endgroup$
    – J. Manuel
    Commented Dec 4, 2017 at 8:33

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.