Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 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

In exploring ideas that I hit a wall on I routinely will seek input from the Stackexchange communities, occasionally these ideas result in that it's really just not possible what I want to do.

I feel it's somewhat misleading for my questions to show that they have answers but none were accepted because the question has no solution, or I feel that I should arbitrary mark someones answer as accepted to acknowledge I valued their input.

Neither of these seem to be the optimal end result of a question that is determined to not be able to be solved.

I propose that questions should have some kind of not viable, not feasible type conclusion. If this was to be added, it probably should require a medium level of reputation to accept that as the solution to prevent inexperienced stackexchange members from picking it when they just get answers they don't like (especially on show me the c0d3s posts).

share|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

If there's not an answer that states "what you want to do isn't feasible" (and gives a reason) then add your own.

Then accept that answer.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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