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

Consider this situation:

  • Answer 1 is highly voted and/or accepted, but wrong.

    • Problem: Votes are conflated with correctness, especially for visitors who don't know how SE works. The accepted answer checkmark is worse, since the convention on many other sites is "THE answer" rather than "the answer the OP liked best".

  • Answer 2 is correct, but not accepted and with a low score.

    • Problem: Low-voted answers at the bottom of the page are often ignored by visitors.

  • Comments on answer 1 pointing out the errors aren't being responded to by answerer 1. If answer 1 is accepted, comments on the question aren't being responded to by the OP.

    • Problem: Comments are not highly visible (by design) and will likely be missed by visitors.

  • Answer 1 is not Community Wiki.

    • Problem: We don't want to steal answer 2 and give credit/reputation for it to answerer 1 instead.

  • The question is highly viewed, ranks well on Google, and is linked to by popular external resources dealing with the subject.

    • Problem: Lots of people are getting incorrect information, potentially leading them to go elsewhere or avoid joining SE and participating.

This mostly does not apply to Stack Overflow since most (?) tools have versioning. It's definitely been a problem I've seen on Gaming (particularly MMOs and evolving games like Minecraft) and Android (new OS versions), and I could see it applying to many other sites like Web Apps (Facebook changing its layout or privacy settings again, etc.).

In these cases, what do you do to make sure that visitors get the correct information? I've tried flagging for CW to avoid one of the problems mentioned above, but this is almost always declined even in cases of clear wiki-type answers that would benefit from more collaborative editing.

share|improve this question
I'm considering proposing an Outdated post notice, but I want to make sure I have all the information first. – Matthew Read Oct 1 '12 at 21:27
I'm in favor of just appending a version number on the top answer. "Applies to versions X, Y, and Z. Does not work for version W". These should be in bold at the top to make it clear. That way you don't punish the answerer by inviting downvotes from future users. – Mysticial Oct 1 '12 at 21:32
I agree with @Mysticial on this one. That seems like the best idea all around. – Andrew Barber Oct 1 '12 at 21:32
And a big example of this is: But I'm not in that area so I'm not qualified to make such an edit. – Mysticial Oct 1 '12 at 21:34
Oh, I see you're asking about this for other sites. Although versioning information may not be clear on those, I still think that an attempt should be made to version them by other means. – Mysticial Oct 1 '12 at 21:36
@Mysticial That's a good idea. Glad I didn't make my feature-request :P – Matthew Read Oct 1 '12 at 21:37
Oh and flagging for wiki isn't gonna work too well due to social effects. It's not that collaboration is bad, it's that you're taking away something that belongs to someone else. That's why mods are less likely to pull such a trigger. – Mysticial Oct 1 '12 at 21:40

Each post have the date included, and the users should be aware, that everything in the internet have publish date and can be outdated. The same applies to all forums, blogs etc. If someone finds post about Facebook dating 2 years ago, one should not expect it would be still actual.

The only potential problem I see with StackExchange sites, is that you don't see when the answer was accepted and when was the last upvote. I think it would be also a good idea to mark questions with no activity since [X] months graphically so that the visitors would be aware that this in inactive topic, and probably no more actual.

share|improve this answer
I like the idea. But I feel that it's only useful for experienced users. A new or unregistered user coming in from Google is likely to find this too confusing. – Mysticial Oct 1 '12 at 21:48
"Users should know" unfortunately does not mean "users do know". We have to act within reality, or attempt to change it. – Matthew Read Oct 2 '12 at 13:59

You must log in to answer this question.

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