Delete informative code-only answers? Not!

Question

Since we emptied the giant LQ backlog, I've been given the TSA screener treatment a few times. Which is to say, I've been presented with an answer, asked to react to it, and then told that:

• it was a test
• I got the test wrong

In two cases, the answer in question was a perfectly correct, perfectly responsive answer that just so happened to be 100% python code. I said, 'looks good.'

Now, I can imagine that some people don't like code-only answers. By no stretch of the imagination, however, can I see how they deserve to be deleted. People who don't like them might downvote them. But delete?

It seems to me these test questions need to be human-selected. And if these examples were, in fact, human-selected, I'd like to have a few words with the human in question.

I'm not sure, based on the answers, that everyone followed my 'TSA screener' joke.

Airport X-ray machines periodically pop up fake images to test if the screener is paying attention. The 'we already know the answer' review interaction is just the same thing.

I'm not arguing that code-only answers are wonderful. I have no quarrel with people who want to downvote them. I object to being hectored and browbeaten to click 'I understand' when I declined to recommend deletion for one of them.

Answer 1

Early on, we had an unfortunate bug in the quality-check algorithm that resulted in a lot of code-only answers ending up in the queue (and in some cases, deleted). This has since been tweaked, so you should see fewer of these... But very short answers will still tend to end up in the queue, particularly if they're all-code or link-heavy; evaluate these on their merits.

When you come across bogus tests, post examples. We can - and should -tweak our selection algorithms.

Also, if you come across an answer that shouldn't have been deleted (in the review queue or anywhere else), flag for moderator attention and note this.

Answer 2

I have never seen a code-only answer that couldn't be made better with the addition of appropriate text. They are of lower-quality than the same answer with some text.

I agree that out-right deleting them is not the answer. It seems to me that what we need is a mechanism to say that we think a low-quality question can be improved, but isn't something that should be deleted.

Answer 3

It's true that code may answer the askers question. If code is posted that does answer the askers question, that's great, and that's awesome.... for the asker.

However, the goal of Stack Overflow is to be a resource of knowledge not just for the asker, but for future visitors for years to come.

Perhaps someone from Google may stumble upon the question and the corresponding answers. All things being equal, this person may have a slightly different problem or the scope of his or her problem may be different. Thus, all things being equal, even if this person has equal or greater skill as the original asker, this person will likely benefit from having an explanation posted under the code as well.

Considering that most of the activity on a post happens within minutes or hours of it being posted, someone coming from Google doesn't have the same advantages as the original asker. The asker, if confused by the code-only answer, can ask for clarification in the comments, and most of the time the person posting the answer -- or a passerby -- will clarify.

For those coming from Google, the original person who answered may not be around, and there may be few active people lurking around the page. Therefore, it's in everyone's best interests to post a summary under the code. This helps guarantee the answer is useful to future visitors, who just happen to outnumber the asker by a ratio of N to 1.

As an aside, since many people from Google may not have a Stack Overflow account, this could help reduce the number of comments posted as answers, which create more maintenance work for the community. What better way to eliminate "not an answer" flags than to prevent them from happening in the first place by posting thorough, detailed answers!

Fortunately, it's not hard to put in an explanation as an answerer, and the extra effort is more likely to result in more upvotes! If that didn't happen, if no summary was submitted, then the next best thing is for us to try to edit and add an explanation, if possible. If not, then the post has served its purpose by helping only the asker, and it should be deleted.

Answer 4

I haven't yet seen code-only answer that could not be improved by adding some explanatory text (have you?). As such, code-only answers are almost perfect candidates for downvoting:

Downvotes are the community's way of telling peers that their content can be improved...

But (and this is a very very big BUT), in support of your point, note that code-only answers are officially perfectly legal. Neither FAQ nor How To Answer give any indication that these are somehow prohibited.

^{For comparison, look at the strong discouragement given there to link-only answers - "provide context", "may be removed" - there's nothing like that for code-only answers.}

The most negative evaluation I could squeeze from above references so far was clicking the adapted from link in "How To Answer", getting to Answering technical questions helpfully (note - this is not a part of SE network) and finding this statement somewhere in the middle, in a plain text, without any special emphasize:

Code without an explanation is rarely useful, however. At least provide a sentence or two to explain what's going on.

---

Summing up, all the authoritative references I've seen

have no trace that would even remotely hint

that deletion of code-only answers is encouraged - none, zilch, nada.

Because of above, I believe that suggesting deletion as a valid review option for code-only answers would be unfair. Decline to recommend deletion or choosing "Looks Good" for a code-only answer should be considered valid outcome in a test for stuff like this. If this is not the case, either test has to be redesigned / removed, or an authoritative reference should be provided to back up such an expectation in test.

^{For the sake of completeness, I personally agree that code-only is not a reason for deletion but that's not quite relevant here.}

---

Side note. To me, the issue you describe also indicates a problem in review system design. I made a simple test to simulate actioning downvoting-candidate answer and I believe I figured what's wrong there.

1. Review suggested me an answer that I decided to be worth downvoting, not deletion - just an action I mentioned as most likely appropriate for code-only answers.
2. After some fussing with UI, I discovered a tiny link to an answer, clicked it (to open in a new browser tab) and downvoted - so far so good.
3. After that, I returned to review window. It was showing me the same set of options - looks-good, edit, deletion, not-sure. Hm.
4. I refreshed the window, my shiny new downvote was there, great. Now what about my options?
5. Oops there are the same looks-good, edit, deletion, not-sure.

Hey! Hel-lo-o-o-o!! didn't I just actioned the item suggested for review?

Didn't I just put my own precious reputation where my mouth is? ^{downvoting answers is not free, you 'know}

Given that I downvoted, what of these freaking options suit me? None "looks good" now, every one sucks in its own way.

Answer 5

I agree though in the sense that it is truly an informative code-only answer.

If the code is readable such that no further explanation is given/needed/required, I don't think it should be deleted.

But if I am presented with code that looks like spaghetti, unreadable yet answers the question, that is, the code works, I think it deserves a down-vote at the very least (as the tooltip says: This answer is not useful, where usefulness I am subjectively saying depends on readability as well)

So

• don't delete informative code only answers - Up-vote them
• don't delete non-informative code only answers - Down-vote them

Deleting should only be used for comments left as answers or spam.

_{Or when the original poster wants to remove their answer}