This is not about the general topic of answering your own question.
Rather I came upon a question where the asker publishes several slightly different versions of his initial answer while he improves them. Of course, the chronological history is lost on viewers because answers are sorted not for their posting time (purposefully, and that's a good thing).
I am undecided on what to think about it, or how to deal with this when it comes to reviews & flags. Even before I comment, I'd like a discussion, so I can build a better opinion.
After having asked a question, while we're learning new things about the problem, I believe we're faced with two options:
- Edit the question with new information, or
- Add one or more answers
We probably have to distinguish multiple types of questions:
- Benchmarks "how to get things done fastest?"
- Style "What's the most pythonic/beautiful way in doing it?" (probably the same as (1))
- Ordinary questions
For types 1 & 2, multiple answers feel natural, the answers are valid independently of one another.
For type 3 I'd go with option 1, namely editing the question over time as knowledge grows.
Any other opinions? More Q types, or options on how to deal with this as an author?
And finally, could you elaborate on how to react to that particular question?
Just remembered the timeline feature, which helps to sort out the chronology of that question. This would help a reviewer to flag obsolete answers for deletion. But again, let's hear your opinion first..