Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

It's really frustrating that I take time to post my code to github and then even let people know about it by answering questions asking for that exact code on Stack Overflow.

This post is asking for a horizontally scrolling GridView on Android, and I posted that I implemented this and posted a link to the github repository. The link has a full explanation on how to use it.

Android GridView Left to Right Scroll

Kev then came along and deleted my post because he didn't take the time to read the link that says "" and said I should talk more about the relevant part of the "article"

While I am very grateful for the moderators, since without them this site wouldn't be possible, I think more care needs to be taken when deleting posts.

Please undelete my post so that people can get the answer to their question.

share|improve this question
Some of the arguments against posting code elsewhere will likely be that there's the potential for linkrot. What if your code isn't there any more? Will people who come to the site later be able to solve their issues, too? – simchona Sep 4 '12 at 2:32
You're missing the point; if you have only a link, just post a comment. Link-only answers are generally frowned upon, and Kev mentioned that in his comment. Instead, include more information regarding implementation, tips, hints, tricks, anything. – Dave Newton Sep 4 '12 at 2:33
This policy is silly. If the answer is a link only, then edit it to include more code, or make it a comment, or something; but deleting potentially good answers is a terribly idea. – Adam Rackis Sep 4 '12 at 2:34
@AdamRackis No, this policy isn't "really bad", and it's established, and it's been discussed to death. You could argue the answer should have been converted to a comment, but I doubt you'd get much traction beyond that. – Dave Newton Sep 4 '12 at 2:34
@Dave - being established, and having been discussed does not make a policy good. – Adam Rackis Sep 4 '12 at 2:35
@AdamRackis: When I check mod flags in the UTC morning/early noon there are often around 100 NAA flags; lots for link-only answers. We usually convert these answers to comments instead of just deleting them - so nothing is lost. And when an answer is converted to a comment a message related to this process is automatically displayed. – ThiefMaster Sep 4 '12 at 2:36
@Dave - you're right. Sorry. – Adam Rackis Sep 4 '12 at 2:36
This is ridiculous. To accomplish what the question is asking for it requires a lot of code. I wrote all that code for an app of mine and am being nice enough to share it with the StackOverflow community. I don't know what you want me to do other than give the information the user is asking for. If this is how contributers are treated when they try to help, then I guess I'll fade back into the shadows. Sad because I was just about to become very active in the community and help people out with Android development questions. – Jess Sep 4 '12 at 3:03
@Jess You were given two ways to do so; what's the issue with either of those? Storming off in a huff is certainly one initial reaction to a group's cultural mores, but it may not be the most fulfilling. I'd also add that it appears the OP got an answer to their question already, over a year ago. – Dave Newton Sep 4 '12 at 3:16
@Jess You won't be able to get anywhere if you aren't willing to work with the community here. It's not an unreasonable request to add information about what you did to implement the two-way gridview, provide a usage example within the answer on SO, and THEN add your link at the end. – darvids0n Sep 4 '12 at 3:19
@DaveNewton Neither of those options will give the correct end result (a way to have a horizontally scrolling GridView). That requires a decent amount of source code in multiple classes (which I've provided on GitHub). In my experience, old "answered" questions are very valuable to people since they find them when they are looking for a solution. I wanted to add my answer which solves the problem wonderfully, but have run into a lot of friction. I appreciate the answers I have found here, and want to contribute back, but am finding it hard to do so. – Jess Sep 4 '12 at 4:59
@Jess Not sure what else to tell you that hasn't already been said. You might want to consider ways to explain code that don't require every line of code, people do manage to do this with regularity, so I suspect it's possible in your case as well. – Dave Newton Sep 4 '12 at 5:06
Not only have people done it - they have done it in one of the questions you posted your 'link-only' answer to, and the other answer was accepted, too. Plus, you yourself have given plenty of useful answers in the past, before you had a project on Github to promote... – Andrew Barber Sep 4 '12 at 5:33

You can still edit your deleted post. Do so and improve it to a point where it's still a useful answer without the link. However, keep it for reference/additional info.

Then mod-flag your post and we'll most likely undelete it.

share|improve this answer
I updated the post, but it requires the full implementation, which I've linked to on GitHub to help other developers out. I really don't understand the response I've gotten, or what else I can do. I guess I'll just drop the issue, and stick to GitHub for sharing helpful code. Thanks. – Jess Sep 4 '12 at 4:31
@Jess - compile it to byte code and paste in a huge block of 1s and 0s as the answer, that would be sweet irony. – csuwldcat Mar 22 '13 at 18:41

Questions and their answer pair should be compartmentalised to the site. Any external links should be supplementary.

That's what makes these sites tick. To have the information dead centre and not have you chasing links across the Internet.

If you can't print a single Stack Exchange page and have all the relevant information there in your hands, where you rely so much on external chunks or pages, then you need to refactor your post so that it can stand on its own.

Otherwise, it's at best a comment, worse not an answer at all.

share|improve this answer

I was the mod who deleted your answer.

The link-only answer stuff has already been covered pretty well by others, but there's also another problem not mentioned here. What you've also been doing here is astro-turfing old posts with this same answer.

Five of your answers were created within an hour of each other and posted on old questions that already have accepted or highly upvoted answers. Your answers were more or less identical and linking to your github project.

All of this is suggesting that you hunted down specific question just so that you could post a link to your project. This is not something we welcome in our community and it is viewed as excessive self-promotion.

You need to go and spend time contributing answers on our site that aren't fixating on this one problem that you've solved. Go and help solve other problems, there's certainly no shortage of Android questions to keep you busy.

If this type of question arises again, and you think your project will help, then feel free to mention it, but please abide by the general guidelines that answers should be able to stand on their own which is hugely important to our site. Also, if you're posting the same solution each time then there's a fairly good chance that the questions are all duplicates, so flag them instead.

This answer, which we didn't delete still doesn't give much of a clue on how to solve the OP's problem should your GitHub repo go AWOL. You have a whopping 30K characters available to write up a nice detailed canonical answer on how you solved this particular problem. So why not spend time doing this with code snippets and some nice annotations?

Then go and find a more recent question where your answer addresses this problem and post your nicely detailed solution there. If your answer is well written then you should get an accept. After that, if you see the same problem you can either flag as a dupe or (when you have enough rep) add a comment pointing at your nice super-answer.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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