-12

Today I asked a question and someone kindly answered it after 2 minutes. It was a good and correct answer. I put it in my code and it did work.

Then I tried to accept it but system wants me to wait 10 minutes. I don't understand this delay for a situation like this, in which you know for sure the given answer is correct.

Maybe this delay should be removed. In this busy world many of us, when we see a correct answer, will just put in in our code and then leave it for good.

I believe the sooner we can reward the person who answered our question the better.

8
  • 11
    How would you expect the system to know if an answer is 100% correct? – BoltClock's a Unicorn Jul 13 '13 at 12:37
  • @ BoltClock's a Unicorn:how would system knows any accepted answer is correct? – Joe Tatavaran Jul 13 '13 at 12:38
  • @JoeTatavaran, sometimes the person asking the question may not know that an answer is correct either. For example code with variable overflow issues may work most of the time and seem to solve the problem at first. – PeterJ Jul 13 '13 at 12:46
  • Ok so be it, but then how this 10 minute threshold can be explained? – Joe Tatavaran Jul 13 '13 at 12:47
  • @JoeTatavaran The "system" determines which answer is correct by getting the community to vote for the best one. With high probability, the highest voted answer is correct :) (more specifically, the answers are expected to be given a fairly accurate "correctness" score, allowing one to order them from "most" correct to "least" correct down to "incorrect". Fortunately the "system" does not yet prevent one from accepting an answer with a negative score.. which is a good thing, I guess. – Thomas Jul 13 '13 at 12:54
  • But then, @Thomas, the system needs to allow people to vote before it can tell which is the best voted answer. And then again, it needs some time to do so. – Arjan Jul 13 '13 at 12:55
  • @Arjan Yes, which is why a minimum time is specified before accepting an answer, so that you can review the system's (community's) opinion of your choice of "correct" and select the answer you wish to accept more objectively :) (I agree that a 10 minute limit is a bit low in any case - if anything it should be increased for consistency, but then people would eventually forget to accept answers). But I think that is the rationale. – Thomas Jul 13 '13 at 12:58
  • Ok, @Thomas, I wrongly understood that you were responding to BoltClock, about how to make the system allow for accepting an answer sooner than after 10 minutes. My bad! – Arjan Jul 13 '13 at 13:00
9

I kinda agree with what you are saying but consider the situation that you accept an answer after 2 minutes and then 5 minutes later you get an even better answer. A more efficient one and with more details.

Since people mainly look into accepted answers as a solution , the more mature is the solution is better.

2

Perhaps, but this good situation does not happen all of the time and 10 minutes is a very short period of time to wait to accept and encourages those who need a bit of time to consider the answer.

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