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

Earlier today, I wrote a quick answer on a question, and received an upvote. I then saw a comment on the question identifying it as an exact duplicate (the asker had asked the same question twice within minutes). I then deleted my answer, and voted to close the duplicate question, before writing a new, longer answer on the original question. This new answer received no upvotes.

I later noticed that the duplicate question hadn't been closed (lack of 3k+ attention, I suppose) and had received a bit of action in the interim. Because of this, I flagged the question for moderator review, and recommended merging the questions.

This left me with two answers on the same question - one with a detailed answer with no upvotes, and another shorter, deleted answer with one upvote.

What I did next might constitute reputation whoring. I copied the text from the unvoted answer into the upvoted answer, then deleted the unvoted answer and undeleted the upvoted answer.

I think this is OK because the longer answer was a superset of the shorter one, so the upvote was still valid. I'd just like the community to weigh in on whether or not what I did was ok.

Is this sort of behaviour allowed, and do you consider it ethical?

share|improve this question
    
in the end, he still has a better answer then if you had not bothered. i believe both where your answers and thus up to you how you wanted to deliver the answer in the best way for both of you. So i think its perfectly fine. However, i think this question might be very subjective from person to person. – Andy Dec 16 '10 at 11:03
    
@Andy: I think I'm ok with it mainly because had I not known it was a dupe, I would have edited the upvoted answer into the longer answer anyway, so I'm just "setting history right." – AgentConundrum Dec 16 '10 at 11:10
up vote 7 down vote accepted

This sounds fine to me. Someone found your original answer helpful and upvoted it. Your new answer now contains that same information (and more), so I don't see any harm in keeping the vote.

share|improve this answer
1  
That was my rationale. It's nice to have a mod back it up though. – AgentConundrum Dec 16 '10 at 15:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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