Is it possible to make a question Community Wiki to avoid the appearance of, and discussions about, rep-gathering (especially when it's a "easy" question likely to get many upvotes) but not the answers, because it is a regular question and not a CW one?

Disclaimer: I am of course asking this for a serious question over on SO, and not for any of these possible MSE questions that would turn out to be instant favourites with the community, and net a ton of upvotes:

  • 3
    Not really, no. When you make the question CW, all the answers after that will automatically be CW. If a moderator makes the questions CW, all answers, even the ones given before the question became CW, will also become CW. – alex Feb 13 '10 at 10:55
  • +1 Pekka: I think that is a great idea. Unfortunate, though... – IAbstract Feb 13 '10 at 16:09
  • @dboarman cheers. Unfortunate why? – Pekka Feb 13 '10 at 16:18
  • *loads shotgun* someone mention unicorns? :) – quack quixote Feb 13 '10 at 19:02
  • @Pekka: ...unfortunate that it's an all or nothing on CW. An alternative mode for asking questions considered easy, basic, common knowledge, etc. would diminish gains from up-votes. While the questions may be basic to most of us, there are going to be members who don't understand the purpose of static classes, patterns, etc. As a self-taught, above average hobby developer, these are some of the building blocks I miss out on (esp. patterns). C# Unleashed just does not cover some things in detail. So you turn to the Internet to start filling in gaps. :) – IAbstract Feb 13 '10 at 19:17
  • @quack I added one for you! :) @dboarman Good point. The question I have in mind is actually kind of a PHP security reference, which exists in the form of dozens of separate questions but not as a "compendium". I'm ready to chip in a 550 bounty to get it started but need to get it through the first 24 hours alive :) Which is why I'm asking. I wouldn't want to make it CW because it would take away incentive to answer. Rep whoring is a non-issue anyway really, because if you're somewhat active on SO, you'll hit the rep cap either way. – Pekka Feb 13 '10 at 19:36
  • See also the feature request "Option to not gain rep for votes on a question, but still have answers gain rep." at meta.stackexchange.com/questions/41220/… – Arjan Mar 17 '10 at 21:58

It used to be possible, but evidently no longer is. Sorry about posting an incorrect answer earlier, and thanks to everyone who jumped in to correct me.

Yes. When you make a question CW, all of the answers are CW by default. Each person can still manually uncheck the CW box on their answer before posting.

If you're trying to avoid the appearance of rep whoring, but you think the question is still valid (maybe for a question you intend to answer yourself, or whatever reason), I don't think it would be out of line to put a note at the end of the question pointing out the CW state of the question and reminding people to make their answers non-CW.

  • 1
    Cheers @Bill, didn't know that! And good advice. – Pekka Feb 13 '10 at 13:03
  • 4
    @Bill: are you sure? It used to work that way, but I haven't seen the CW checkbox when composing a new answer to a CW question in ages... – Shog9 Feb 13 '10 at 18:22
  • 4
    No, this does NOT work. Answers posted to CW questions do not have the option box for CW or not. – Pollyanna Feb 13 '10 at 18:32
  • 1
    You can test this by posting an answer to meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13390/… – Pollyanna Feb 13 '10 at 18:33
  • 1
    Or post to this SO wiki question: stackoverflow.com/questions/713232/… – Pollyanna Feb 13 '10 at 18:34
  • @Pollyanna Awww. That's too bad! Thanks for the heads up. – Pekka Feb 13 '10 at 18:37
  • 1
    Seven up votes for an incorrect answer. This voting thing works. NOT! – raven Feb 13 '10 at 18:48
  • @Pollyanna In the spirit of leaving correctly answered questions for future generations, can you post an answer saying "no"? I'll switch the accept if I still can. – Pekka Feb 13 '10 at 18:50
  • @raven is right on this one. You can downvote me when I'm wrong folks. ;) – Bill the Lizard Feb 13 '10 at 18:50
  • @Bill: yet nobody does. High rep users can do no wrong, now can they? (Lest anyone not get it, I'm just playing Devil's advocate here. I have nothing but respect for Bill.) – raven Feb 13 '10 at 21:57
  • @pekka - Shogs got you covered in the other answer, thanks though. – Pollyanna Feb 13 '10 at 21:58
  • @raven - eh, I don't downvote. – Pollyanna Feb 13 '10 at 22:01
  • @Pollyanna: I like that attitude, and I am trying to adopt it, but haven't quite got the hang of it yet. – raven Feb 13 '10 at 22:07
  • @Pollyanna: I'll take comments explaining why I'm wrong over downvotes any day. Both together is fine, but downvotes alone would have definitely left me scratching my head, particularly in this case when I know I used to be right. – Bill the Lizard Feb 13 '10 at 22:16
  • @raven @bill - I'm not convinced that never downvoting is the right thing to do. Mostly I leave negative comments and let others do the dirty work so I don't have to sully my hands... ;-D – Pollyanna Feb 14 '10 at 1:32

You must log in to answer this question.

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