This answer was tied for 3rd place out of 9 answers - at least 12 people thought it was good. While it didn't adhere to one restriction provided in the question, I did try to make the argument that the restriction was unreasonable and provided a solid answer for solving the problem behind the question. I'm sure it had value to the people who came across it later. As a comment it's much more likely to be ignored.
What is meta?
- Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
- The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
- Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates
Well, it's not really an answer, but it's very old and has a score of 12. A relic from another time; today that answer would never pass muster.
I undeleted it, but left the converted comments (since they really do make more sense under the question).
SO takes the stance that answers are preferable to comments. In fact, this came up earlier today:
Conversely we have a problem with chatty answers. But IMO it's clear that this one, the system called wrong. We do not want terse, informative answers like Mark's to wind up in comments; rather we want terse, informative comments that answer the question to be posted as terse, informative answers. In any case it is possible to write high quality answers resembling Mark's, where "resembling" means, "up to the point our tools can detect."
To flesh this out - if humans are debating this, then the machine was too aggressive. It is much preferred to let something questionable be an answer, where our community is much better at moderating it. Comments can't receive downvotes, all they can do is produce more comments shouting them down where they are very difficult to ignore. If Mark truly posted an uninformative answer, it would get downvoted, critiqued, etc., possibly edited or deleted. This wouldn't happen to a comment, you would just get like 6 more nearly equally valid looking comments. And now we're starting to sound a lot more like the opposite of what SO is.