Timeline for Are bad answers necessarily low quality posts?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2012 at 14:31 | history | edited | chrisaycock | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added paragraph to get at the OP's question.
|
| Aug 18, 2012 at 14:28 | comment | added | chrisaycock | @nhahtdh Agreed. "Low-quality" means the post can't be salvaged. | |
| Aug 18, 2012 at 14:25 | comment | added | nhahtdh | For me, I consider answers that is written with so bad grammar/spelling that I cannot understand to rewrite as "low-quality". | |
| Aug 18, 2012 at 14:21 | comment | added | chrisaycock | @bitmask I'd probably say "looks good". | |
| Aug 18, 2012 at 14:20 | comment | added | bitmask | I agree with you. But would your say "Looks Good" or "Not Sure" in the review tool? I think both are wrong, in a way. The set of options implies that everything that wrong or slightly egregious answers should be deleted. | |
| Aug 18, 2012 at 14:16 | history | answered | chrisaycock | CC BY-SA 3.0 |