Stack Overflow provides good tools in the question editor, like "Links" and "Styling".
Another thing that for me would be nice is a color selector. Although an HTML editor is available, a direct click on tool would be good, and users can select different colors, as for marking errors in their program with red, and more important data with blue.
No, seriously. Having colors would enable people to abuse them. Of course, we also have a possibility for people to abuse headlines or subscripts, but colors can be very distracting if not used correctly.
In order to highlight stuff, we already have boldface and emphasized text. If you can't make clear what the error is, for example, you probably need to rewrite a bit.
I would like to give an example of a question where colours are used.
I think if used cautiously, colours can help to underline the content of a text very effectively. Of course, the opposite can happen as well; but to me the risk should not be too big.
I don't see any value such a feature would give except for adding complexity and the potential for rather horrific looking questions.
This would be particularly useful in providing answers where color is important, without having to opt for screenshots.
An obvious example is making error text clear from normal output; most systems will show console errors in red-on-black to distinguish them from the regular output in white-on-black.
The only argument against seems to be fear of misuse. Any feature can be abused; that's not a reason not to implement something. Just ensure that guidelines on when it's acceptable to use are made clear in the guidelines. The SO community are very good at self-policing, so users will likely quickly learn what's appropriate & fall in with the guidelines.
as for marking errors in their program with red
In that case, it wouldn't be possible to write code that is formatted as code, and contemporary mark a line with a specific color.
Apart that use case, I don't think there are use cases where colors make the post clearer. What is more important in a post is its content, not the color used for the text, or the background.
It's already possible to put colors by (ab)using MathJax for the stacks that support it.
\$\color{red}{\text{WARNING}}\$
Here's a real example of a post where colors -- while not essential -- help to clarify the explanation without overloading it with additional symbols or notes.
A really motivated user could also upload an image of colored text anyway -- just like they could post a unicorn riding a rainbow, if they think the post looks somehow better that way.
Because it's possible to do it by hackish ways, I personally think that it would be fine to allow it natively. Apart from spam posts, we don't see many pictures of unicorns or any abusive content. We don't even see many posts ENTIRELY WRITTEN IN BOLD AND ALL CAPS. So I think we should just trust the users for colors as well.
$\color{red}{\text{WARNING}}$.
Commented
Dec 21, 2023 at 14:55
Our brains have millions of years of evolutionary adaptation to visual (i.e. colour) processing, whereas symbolic processing is a relatively late addition to our daily life...
That point aside, I just wanted to add that a judicious use of colour can call out an especially relevant point in an otherwise long / detailed post: this allows posters to provide all the relevant details, while also allowing other users to quickly navigate the post, without overlooking important details.
Bold and italics can do this as well, but only up to a certain point. Eventually (because everything is the same colour), bold type competes with headers (and italics do not make text "jump out" in the same way; not to mention they can be very hard to read).
As for the "people will abuse it" argument. The community already has guidelines for how to post a question (which has far more potential for being misused than colour IMO), and we have community members with the ability to edit posts and manage content. Surely allowing one or two colours is something this community can handle, no?
