What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 130 Stack Exchange communities.

This question already has an answer here:

So I asked this question recently, and then figured out what was wrong myself after an hour or so of investigation. Nobody else had put the correct solution down, so being a thoughtful chap I posted my answer and put an update in the question. Being that there wwere no other upvoted answer and that I'm not able to mark my question as accepted for a couple of days I decided that I'd also put [SOLVED] in the title to show to anyone looking through the list of unanswered questions that its been solved.

Now clearly I've broken some sort of unwritten rule here, because someone has downvoted it - apparently because of the [SOLVED] in the question.

Never mind that the question is well written, correctly tagged, and that its even a pretty reasonable question - none of that is worthy of an upvote, but trying to be helpful and putting [SOLVED] in the title is worth of a downvote...

The best bit is that whoever downvoted the question was quite probably perfectly capable of editing the title themselves anyway, but they chose to downvote it instead...

Gah! (</rant>)

Anyway - so I take it there is a taboo against putting [SOLVED] in the title of a question?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Aziz Shaikh, hims056, Azik, Martijn Pieters, gnat Oct 29 '13 at 12:14

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

34  
I'd consider voting you down for closing your rant without having first opening the tag ... –  Unsliced Dec 4 '09 at 15:21
1  
Should we edit posts to removed the [solved] ? –  Martin Beckett Dec 2 '11 at 16:40
    
@MartinBeckett I generally do nowadays –  Justin Dec 2 '11 at 16:42
    
@Justin then I will as well - a democracy of two! –  Martin Beckett Dec 2 '11 at 16:42

4 Answers 4

up vote 6 down vote accepted

There are several threads that show you how to deal with that situation give you reasons why to answer your own question. Look here:

So even deliberately asking a question to answer it yourself is encouraged, as well as, after a waiting period of 2 days, accepting your own answer. These sites are all about great answers to great questions. Who cares whether both come from one person.

share|improve this answer

Yes, the correct way is to add an answer and accept it (even if you yourself provide it)

share|improve this answer
    
I see you already posted it as an answer and got an upvote –  jmfsg Dec 4 '09 at 14:35

Mark your own answer as accepted to signal the question is solved.

If people downvote you for the wrong reasons, complain on meta, and many people will vote you up if you're right. (I did here.)

share|improve this answer

"Users with less than 100 reputation points cannot answer their own questions for 7-8 hours," may be the error message that causes people to do this. Consider reducing the points required to release this restriction?

share|improve this answer
    
This is a separate feature-request, although the 8 hour limit has a good rationale, so it's probably staying around –  Michael Mrozek Jul 31 '11 at 4:48
1  
@Michael: Did you mean for the feature request link to go to this question? –  Chris Frederick Jul 31 '11 at 4:52
    
@Chris No, I meant it like "This should be posted as a feature-request instead of an answer". I don't think it's a duplicate, that question was proposing some sort of draft answer system; this is just "it should require less rep/time to self-answer" –  Michael Mrozek Jul 31 '11 at 6:07
    
@Michael: Great, thanks for clarifying! –  Chris Frederick Jul 31 '11 at 6:13

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