It looks to me that once a bounty is awarded, the post no longer has the visibility of a featured question. This one time I rather promptly answered satisfactorily someone's featured question, and OP offered to delay awarding the bounty, so that the question, and thus also my answer, stays featured longer. OP explicitly said that this way, perhaps the question and/or the answer can get more votes.

I told OP that OP is free to accept whenever OP wishes (if at all), and OP quickly did soon after. OP left a comment that this way OP didn't have to remind OP's-self to award it later.

So if it's true that a featured question is no longer featured once the bounty is won, then isn't that kind of harsh to the bounty winners?

Perhaps it's a good idea to have a special "featured answers" section, which is basically where featured questions temporarily goes after the bounty is won. Not only will this help the bounty winners get more votes (a nice bonus on top of the bounty points), but it's also good to showcase what stackoverflow community is capable of. That is, these are the "harder" questions people have asked, and here are the awesome answers that the community came up with. Everybody wins!

Anyway, thoughts?

share|improve this question
    
(-1) for the reasons in my answer. –  devinb Jun 21 '10 at 8:19
add comment

4 Answers

The goal of bounties being brought as "featured" is to bring attention to the question, not the answer. Kudos to the user who wants to reward a good answer more, but bringing attention to the answer is simply a side-effect. You already get the healthy sum from the bounty and the side-effect bonus in the first place, I don't see that lumping additional stuff is necessary.

The sites are for finding answers to questions, not simply answers in general. Most people don't go hunting around for really good answers simply to upvote them. Just because the question was important at one time to some people, it shouldn't qualify it for some permanently highlighted feature. It already got 7 days of exposure, after all. That exposure was paid for by the author, and the bounty winner traditionally gets some level of reward during that period.

Exceptional answers get rewarded already... do we really need to super-promote them? How much more reputation do you need to feel that your contribution to helping someone was worth it?

share|improve this answer
add comment

I disagree very strongly.

The only distinction between bounty questions and regular questions is that someone offered extra incentive to answer it. It does not mean that the question is any better than other questions. It does not mean that the answers are any better than other questions.

The participants do not deserve more rep/attention just because they participated in a bounty. The chance to receive the bounty is their reward.

Once the question has been answered, it then becomes just like any other question. If a question was answered particularly well, that is great, I do not deny it. But answering a bounty question with an "above-and-beyond" answer already nets you a gain of reputation (you win). If, on the other hand, you answer a normal question with an "above-and-beyond" answer, you get the checkmark, and then the answer fades into obscurity, as all questions/answer do.

Bottom line: After the bounty has been awarded, the question is just like every other question, and that is how it should be.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Seems like a lot of extra work for a small part of the system.

But at the same time, as you said, I don't like that a question simply drops off the map.

Maybe something simpler would suffice -- what about having the Community User bump the question when a bounty is awarded?

share|improve this answer
add comment

Yes, but this is the way it always worked -- before when bounty was tied to accepted answers (and only question owners could start bounties), the question owner had to accept to award the bounty.

Under the old system, once an answer was accepted, the bounty was over, and the question was no longer featured.

It's actually a bit better now in that (assuming the question owner is the person who started the bounty) the question owner can accept an answer first, which does not end the bounty -- but it does dock the "best" answer to the top of the question. Then, the bounty can be awarded a bit later, as long as the question owner doesn't forget to do so and accidentally let the bounty expire and go back to auto-accept rules.

Anyway, my point is that the system is already more flexible to accommodate what you're asking for, in a way it could not before.

share|improve this answer
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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