I propose allowing posting new comments on any post I already have comments on, even if I drop below the rep threshold for the comment-privilege (50 rep) later.

And maybe also always allow responding to any ping (editors, dupe-hammer-wielders and mod-closers can be pinged even if they never commented).

Background: I recently made this comment on a post. Shortly thereafter, I put bounty on another one of my questions, which brought my reputation below 50. Then, when this follow-up was posted, I was unable to respond because of the requirement that I have at least 50 reputation to comment.

  • @ShadowWizard when OP post the question it did not had a [feature-request] tag. It was for [discussion]. That's why the 'general' answer. But, later the tag fea-req was added to and the down-votes started pouring. Aug 17 '15 at 11:46
  • 1
    @HackerKarma not relevant. Original form was "I think it might be a good idea..." and he was expecting "yes, because..." or "no, because..." answers, but you just explained something OP was already aware of. Using my apples metaphor, OP asked "you think this apple tastes good?" and you said "apple is a fruit" Aug 17 '15 at 11:58
  • @ShadowWizard I will follow your advice. Aug 17 '15 at 12:05
  • 1
    Related: meta.stackexchange.com/q/4780/162102 Sep 25 '18 at 1:19

The current comment privilege is there to prevent spam mostly. Comments aren't moderated like questions and answers, so it is clear why we don't want anyone to comment.

In this case, you have proven that you aren't a spammer, since you have made some positive contribution to the community, hence your reputation. If you have commented on an answer pointing out it is wrong, and the author asks you for clarification, nothing is more frustrating than that you can't reply any more.

The above proves comments can be significant. I am in a little doubt here. First, we don't want to make things too complicated. And if you lose reputation due to voting fraud, we don't want you to keep your privileges. On the other hand, you have made a valid point why you would want to give this privilege to users under 50 reputation.

Given that you gave a pretty narrowed down functionality after losing the privilege (only to reply to previously-commented-on posts), I think I can agree with this feature request.

  • 1
    The request appears to be fairly limited, not allowing general commenting after gaining the privilege, but only to reply to previously-commented-on posts, which should make the potential abuses rather less significant. (Someone that's already engaged will get a notification when they comment, so throwing spam in or something wouldn't be effective.) Aug 17 '15 at 8:31
  • 1
    Indeed @NathanTuggy Okay. I will make it a yes. Aug 17 '15 at 8:32

Another edge case for this is that moderators can convert answers to comments. If a low-rep user posts an answer that makes a good comment, and a moderator converts it to a comment, and then somebody else replies to that comment, the user can't reply to them. I think a general rule of "users should be able to comment on posts where they already have a comment" covers both cases.

Also, I find the score on this question baffling. What is the downside to this feature?

You must log in to answer this question.

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