What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 130 Stack Exchange communities.

On a few occasions when helping a user, often an unregistered user, the right answer has been provided and the user has explicitly thanked and confirmed that the answer works using the comments.

Assuming the unregistered user system works on cookies, I think the chances are low that after some time has passed you are likely to see them again.

An automatic system would be too problematic to implement, but what about a review for acceptance flag?

This way if the right answer has definitely been provided and confirmed by the user in the comments, it could be accepted by a moderator.

Below are a couple of examples where it is clear the right answer has been provided but not accepted by the user:

Example 1

Example 2

EDIT : Addressing the issue of abuse of the system.

I said accepted by a moderator above as I considered it to be a fairly important issue. But instead it could still be flagged for review requiring either a certain number of people to vote for it (much like closing a question) on the review page or perhaps people with over a certain rep.

To avoid abuse a reputation penalty could be associated with flagging content that has not been explicitly confirmed i.e. -15 points or more if it is found there is no explicit confirmation.

share|improve this question
1  
I really don't see why this question should have been downvoted. I don't think it was a ridiculous question to ask. In essence can we accept answers users have confirmed as the right ones but not accepted themselves?. The main issue I can see from Marc's answer is fear of abuse leading to an increased work load. This is fair enough, but I don't think that means it is a bad idea, just that a different implementation might be needed. –  tw16 Aug 1 '11 at 10:45
    
@tw, on Meta, downvoting means that people disagree with your idea, not that they think it is a bad question - see meta.stackoverflow.com/faq#vote-differences –  dsolimano Aug 1 '11 at 12:01

1 Answer 1

Very slippery slope... I don't have any numbers on this (except for having answered more than a few questions), but personally I think the intersecion between "hasn't accepted an answer" and "has stated in a comment that something is the answer* is so small that it makes a bigger mess by opening up a "vote for accepted answer" option, which will be (ab)used to cover the wider "hasn't accepted an answer" circle. That is something we have never done, for many reasons.

In both examples, the answer has seen upvotes, which is an endorsement of the answer. Personally, I'd much rather leave it like that than open a very problematic door of accepted-answers-by-proxy.

it could be accepted by a moderator

Honestly, they are busy already. I would not want to be abusive by suggesting something more for them to do, especially when every Tom, Dick and (more occasionally) Harriet will want their answer accepted.

share|improve this answer
    
I see where you're coming from, but I think a different implementation could be sought. I said moderator as I thought it was a fairly important issue, but it could still be flagged for review requiring either a certain number of people to vote for it on the review page or perhaps people with over a certain rep. To avoid abuse a reputation penalty could be associated with flagging content that has not been explicitly confirmed i.e. -15 points or more if there is no explicit confirmation. –  tw16 Aug 1 '11 at 11:00
    
With regards to my examples, yes there have been upvotes, but there will be other situations where there are none. That could easily lead to someone searching for an answer and leaving with no greater insight into how to solve their problem because they had not read the comments in depth. –  tw16 Aug 1 '11 at 11:01

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .