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

I answered this (closed) question recently. I posted what was admittedly a short answer:

I think you want stripslashes.

However, that was essentially all the asker (thought they) needed, and I believe they accepted it.

I came back earlier to see that answer had been converted to a comment. I don't have any complaint about this, but if seems a little odd for this to happen to an accepted answer. Does it make sense for this to happen? Is a question with no accepted answer better than a question with an accepted but brief answer?

share|improve this question
To make it more of a complete answer, you could have added the reason why stripslashes is the answer they were looking for. Short answers with a single link can be converted automatically to comments. – Oded Sep 5 '12 at 18:59
Does the last line of this answer have any truth to it? He didn't include any context but I'd guess that if there is an issue with the answer you proposed it's probably better off not being the accepted answer (in addition to the other more generic reasons). – Aaron Bertrand Sep 5 '12 at 19:00
@AaronBertrand: The answer does what the asker asked for. Whether he should be asking for it in the first place is another problem. For what he (initially) wanted to do, stripslashes is the way to do it. – Eric Sep 5 '12 at 19:01
@Eric ok, but you didn't answer my question, which I think is relevant. – Aaron Bertrand Sep 5 '12 at 19:02
@AaronBertrand: I don't think the last line is meaningful. In what context should you not use it? If for whatever reason you need to evaluate character escape sequences in a string, then stripslashes is without a doubt what you want to use. – Eric Sep 5 '12 at 19:03
@Eric I don't know, I don't use PHP. I would ask him for more context. However I doubt he would say that just to blaspheme other answers. – Aaron Bertrand Sep 5 '12 at 19:05
up vote 14 down vote accepted

Having accepted an answer should have no bearing on the 'convert to comment' functionality.

If the post is not an answer, it should be converted to a comment (as appropriate). You can argue whether the answer should have converted to a comment in the first place, but 'accepting' that answer should not be a means of stopping that process. That would, in essence, be locking out a vital piece of functionality.

share|improve this answer
This seemingly contradicts another behavior exhibited by accepted answers - namely, the author's inability to delete them. I would argue that if an answer should be convertible to a comment, it should also be deletable. – dasblinkenlight Sep 5 '12 at 19:14
@dasblinkenlight It's a different issue. The basic philosophy of deleting content is that once you post something to SE, it becomes part of the collection and no longer belongs exclusively to you. Still, we let people remove their own content as long as it doesn't take away from or affect the contribution of others (e.g. can't delete questions that have answers, etc). An author having accepted your answer pushes your content more towards that "part of the collective contribution" side of that equation. – Robert Cartaino Sep 5 '12 at 19:24
@dasblinkenlight Not really the same thing, self deletions of good content are generally discouraged, the other example being askers not being able to delete their questions if there are upvoted answers. – Yannis Sep 5 '12 at 19:24
@RobertCartaino There is still an inconsistency: once an accepted answer gets "demoted" to a comment, the author can delete what used to be "part of the collective contribution", because the "deletion of accepted answer" lock no longer applies. – dasblinkenlight Sep 5 '12 at 19:32
@dasblinkenlight Converting a post to a comment is a moderation issue correcting something that was posted incorrectly (assuming they made the correct call), so there's nothing inconsistent about it. A user having accepted the incorrectly-posted answer does make the location of the post any more correct, if it should have been a comment in the first place. – Robert Cartaino Sep 5 '12 at 19:38
I agree, but at face value Shog9 disagrees with you. – casperOne Sep 5 '12 at 20:13

You must log in to answer this question.

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