Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 157 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 recently stumbled upon this question, which initially contained a link to but no code. Obviously the questioner had no problem posting it.

The link is active (not a plain text URL) and the whole question only consisted of the link and a paragraph of text. There was no formatted code, not even in backticks.

Has this feature been retracted lately, or is this a bug?

share|improve this question
jsFiddle isn't banned universally, only on "super short posts" (30 characters that aren't links). – Yannis Dec 21 '12 at 19:46
@Yannis, my understanding of Kevin's answer is that they tried that, but it did not give the expected results and they switched to unconditionally requiring code with a link. Maybe I'm wrong, though. – Frédéric Hamidi Dec 21 '12 at 19:49
Could it have been (quickly) edited in after the question was asked initially? – Andrew Whitaker Dec 21 '12 at 23:36
@Andrew, nope, the feature applies to edits. As it should. – Frédéric Hamidi Dec 21 '12 at 23:40
That initial revision does not look very short to me. I suspect it is long enough to get past the requirement. – Jeff Atwood Dec 25 '12 at 3:54
up vote 10 down vote accepted

Silly bug, wasn't accounting for the that was used in that post.

Changed some settings, and now everything should work as expected.

share|improve this answer
"www" is so last century. – Adam Jan 23 '13 at 23:36
Follow-up: Kevin, you may also want to exclude "", as it can be used to circumvent the block, as in this question. – Frédéric Hamidi Sep 24 '14 at 10:38

Such posts were always "allowed" by the system. The issue was with posts that are mainly just a link (<30 plaintext chars).

One can ask a question of that length (it may even be a good one, though that's rare). Why should we block it if the question is of that length and has an extra link?

In general, why should we block posts with no code but links to jsfiddle? The link could easily be only tangentially related to the question or a slightly relevant example.

The problem is not no-code-link-to-fiddle, it was question-too-tiny. Though the system's autoblocker is quite lenient while defining "tiny". Autoblocking should be done only when you're pretty sure that false alarms will be extremely rare. Which is not the case here, imho.

That being said, the question linked to should have inline code. Though it has other issues as well.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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