05:00
(1) Your first answer may not be a good one. Few things on SE are more frustrating than to see someone post a really good question, then see someone else dish out erroneous guidance, and then see the O.P. accept that answer just a few minutes later! That first answer might sound good to you, but how do you know that the matter is truly settled, or that the answer you've been given is even a good one?"
(2) Accepting an answer early makes people less likely to look at your question. This makes it less likely that you'll get another answer, but, equally important, it makes it less likely that people will take a good hard look at the answers you've been given, so a truly bad answer might be less likely to get the comments or downvotes that it deserves."
(3) We have users from all over the world. You may ask a question in India, or Iran, or Italy, and accept it an hour or two later. Depending on what time it is, there's a good chance that no one in the United States or Canada has even looked at your question yet – they're all asleep in bed! There are enough differences in AmEng and BrEng that you owe it to yourself to let the whole world look at a question before considering a matter settled; we all might learn something new."
(4) Accepting answers quickly may encourage quick answers. Some people might race to answer a question fearing that they'll lose a chance to earn rep if they take their time. However, some questions are tougher than they might first appear; perhaps these should take some more time to answer, or be improved with additional research. Let your question percolate in the minds of the community for awhile."
05:33
can anyone look up a duplicate for this question? I feel like i have seen this sn1 vs e1 thing a hundred times on chem.se now -_-
1 hour later…
06:59
@GaurangTandon show me some statistics, or at the very least some anecdotes, that prove that people are less likely to answer (or to look at) questions which already have accepted answers, then I’ll believe it.
Until then, those arguments are no stronger than mine, because they aren’t backed up by anything whatsoever.
I find it really funny that one can make so many assertions in such a factual manner without any proof.
The first one doesn’t even make sense, as it is not the green tick that matters, it is whether OP comes back that matters. An asker can easily “accept” the first - incorrect - answer that comes, without hitting the green tick, and never come back for the right answer. Likewise one can hit the green tick but still come back later to change the accepted answer or unaccept it if something better comes along.
The second one is a complete conjecture, without some kind of evidence it is a meaningless statement.
The third one critically depends on the second as a prerequisite. If accepted answers make people less likely to view or answer the question, then it is a valid point. If not, then it is not a valid point.
The fourth one is also completely hypothetical and I have never seen any such behaviour on our site. As far as I can tell, the quality of posted answers does not depend on whether an accepted answer is present.
All in all - the post you’re citing is written in a very flowery manner which seems to have won people over. However, I don’t think it stands up to closer scrutiny.
I, for one, don’t care whether there’s an accepted answer when I post stuff. Now you can say “but you’re only one person”, which is true, but that ELL meta post has exactly zero valid examples, so I don’t see how it’s any better.
The example in the answer is not valid, because the same could well have happened without the green tick being hit. The problem is not with the quick green tick, but rather with the OP’s lack of perseverance:
Increasing the time limit wouldn't necessarily help. A lot of the new users are often not even aware that they could/should accept an answer. In case of your example, the following could have also happened: OP posts his first question, gets an erroneous answer, assumes that to be good advice, and leaves never to return. The end result is still the same. I wish it could be better, but too bad, things go wrong sometimes. Well, at least future readers would be wiser as a result of that question and answer, and there's not much more we can do. :-) — Masked Man Jan 4 '15 at 9:02
« first day (385 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1643 days later) »
Transcript for
Apr13
Apr '1814
Apr15
Spring Cleaning
[reaction]: goo.gl/KPBWGE || possible chemdraw query: goo.gl/3...
