To remove the problem of fastest typer getting more rep points out of a question, how about locking the answers for the first 2 minutes i.e. anybody can post an answer but it will not appear in the page until the question itself is 2 minutes old. I am sure the OP will not have too many problems with the 2 minute delay. It will allow people to write more thoughtful answers than just quickly typing some short answers. What is your opinion about it?
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
For the 1,000th time...
FASTEST GUN IN THE WEST IS NOT A PROBLEM
If someone is the quickest to post an answer and it is the CORRECT answer, then you just did the OP a service by giving them an extremely fast answer.
If someone posts a quick answer and it stinks, there is no reason for it to be upvoted (and it would likely be downvoted for being horrible), which means that another more correct answer will move to the top of the list.
Fast and Correct are NOT mutually exclusive. Some people are able to post good answers very quickly and I think that they should definitely be rewarded for it. Some people post garbage answers very quickly and they already get punished by it with downvotes. And the best answer will generally always bubble up to the top. If you spent 5 more minutes creating a big long answer that is better than the quick and dirty one, you may not get the check mark, but in the long run you will earn a MUCH greater score than a short and dirty one.
Please stop trying to punish those who work quickly and effectively. If someone is able to post the correct answer to my question 5 seconds after I post it, I am -extremely- happy and I am not going to sit there and say "No, you went too fast" I'm going to say "Holy crap that was fast, thanks!"
Woah there! Classic error you're making here. You've got a valid grouch, but your solution is like blindfolding the whirling dervishes to keep them from accidentally falling into that open manhole. Nope, you're gonna want to use that blindfold to bind their legs, mate.
More explicitly: If you didn't show the answers for two minutes: You'd have a boat load of duplicates upon duplicates in that time.
What you really want to do is to: NOT ALLOW VOTING ON ANSWERS FOR TWO/FIVE MINUTES!!!
This defeats the imperative of getting people answers to their questions as quickly as possible. Any fastest-gun effects are a price worth paying for that.
Basically, your suggestion might be good for optimizing SO as a game, for certain sets of game rules, but loses sight of the core purpose of solving people's problems.
And then which answer would you list on top?
(I guess whatever delays we come up with, it won't keep a few from trying to gain reputation. And once those few get more relaxed about it, there will be new members who are eager to be on top. Too bad, but I doubt it can be avoided. It may even make some people stop from answering, as they may expect some answers to be in the wait-to-be-shown-queue?)
The problem lies deeper, in the voting system itself beeing an inadequately designed mechanism - IMHO.
I wish there were be constraint on how fast the questioner can leave the site - I don't like when I leave my answer or ask for clarification and I have to wait a couple of hours to get response from the OP. Of course this is practically impossible.
You could also quickly type in a sort answer: "Maybe. Detailed answer is coming sortly." and then start editing your answer.
The thing I would prefer is to have the good answer before I even ask my own question ;)