There is a lot of questions about the same problem: "What does Tenacious badge mean?"

The short description of the badge is really hard to understand (as shown in the question 69322), and a lot of questions received an answer with pointer to the List of all badges with full descriptions, and this link often was enough to enlighten the asker.

Jeff Atwood answered the question "Why is the description on the badges page so sparse?" with suggestion that more descriptive descriptions would be too confusing for the users, and the badges should be surprise, not a goal.

I humbly insinuate that while that answer seems to match the original question it has been quoted from, for that question it is not a good answer. A small link would not clutter the page readability. Also if there are badges, and they are displayed publicly, then their description should be understandable. Hiding a good description of some component smells a little like security-by-obscurity.

There is a lot of questions concerning this topic, and a lot of them has no accepted answer. (I upvoted these questions, but I doubt it will draw attention to them, as they are usually pretty old.) For example:

Two answers for the question "What does the “tenacious” badge reward?" form a beautiful description of the badge - they answer the question "Why this badge exists", and "What good has been done by this user".

I understand that Jeff does not want to see the descriptions which tell us "what should I click to get this badge", but the descriptions like these two mentioned above are a different thing. Similar descriptions tell me why should I respect the user bearing this badge.

Maybe not all badges need more details - probably bronze ones do not. So, how about adding a short description in this style?

  • If you want me to wear 37 pieces of flair, like your pretty boy over there, Brian, why don't you just make the minimum 37 pieces of flair?
    – user7116
    Dec 14, 2011 at 15:51


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .