-8

I hate the new popup "you can accept an answer in 10 minutes". Can you please remove it and let me accept an answer immediately?

I can unaccept it later if a better one appears.

|improve this question
  • 4
    There's a real pattern going on regarding impatience and feature requests on Meta. – Super Long Names are Hilarious Apr 22 '10 at 9:46
  • Why do you want to accept an answer in short span? – Gopi Apr 22 '10 at 10:22
  • 1
    -11 versus +44 -- I think the current Discourage questions being marked as answered within an hour or so of being posted wins... – Arjan Apr 22 '10 at 12:48
  • @Length: haven't you heard? we're in the "me me me, now now now" generation. – Ether Apr 22 '10 at 14:51
  • 3
    @Length - sometimes you just know an answer is right. stackoverflow.com/questions/2689607/… If I can't accept it now, I might forget about it altogether and never accept this answer. – ripper234 Apr 22 '10 at 15:08
  • 3
    @ripper234 - If your memory can't last 10 minutes, I think you have bigger problems. – Super Long Names are Hilarious Apr 22 '10 at 17:31
  • @ripper234 - Next time you ask a question and some guy tells you to work on your accept rate, you can go back and accept your answers :p – Aren B Sep 24 '10 at 23:42
  • Your accept rate is updated only once per day, so what difference will a few minutes make? – Yi Jiang Jan 17 '11 at 7:30
  • @Yi Jiang I did not know that ;) – IAdapter Jan 17 '11 at 7:37
  • 3
    "I promise to accept only one answer per question." You can only accept one answer per question anyway. – George Claghorn Jan 17 '11 at 13:51
  • 1
    this question is actually rather good, why downvote it? – Lucas - Better Coding Academy Aug 25 '12 at 23:34
  • Some consider patience still a virtue. – Xan-Kun Clark-Davis Feb 23 '18 at 16:29
34

It is our strong belief that if you accept an answer in less than 15 minutes after asking the question, you have not given the community an adequate chance to fully answer your question before rushing to accept.

|improve this answer
  • 12
    Well, it took me 8 months to accept this one :) – ripper234 Jan 30 '11 at 15:38
  • That one really got me philosophical there for a moment :-) – Xan-Kun Clark-Davis Feb 23 '18 at 16:28
13

You can barely test most answers in 10 minutes. Why not wait it out? It's not that hard. If you accept an answer, the interest in that question will most likely drop sharply, so you might lose answers that could have been better.

There's a reason why the 10 minute rule is there. Just be patient and accept the answer after the time expires if it really solved your problem.

|improve this answer
9

Your +15 score for better answer is not really appealing enough for someone to write a good answer that will beat an already accepted one.

What matters is upvotes from other people. And the people enter the question with an accepted answer less frequently than without one.

This partly is due to the motivation why people up/down-vote. It is one of the means of expressing their opinion what answers deserve/don't deserve to be accepted. But if you already marked an answer, then there's no reason to express an opinion: you've already decided what's correct.

So by early acceptance you just get worse answers and your question gets abandoned quickly. Or turns into a flamewar, if you accepted garbage, having no time to check if it's correct.

|improve this answer
5

I can't even begin to estimate the number of questions that I could have answered (at least potentially) better than the answers already there, but didn't bother because the OP had already accepted one of them. This happens almost every day when I get up, since I'm in the UTC-8 timezone and am only starting my day when the peak of SO activity is already waning.

Almost all the questions in the tags I monitor are asked while I'm asleep, so I salute any and all encouragement to slow down on accepting answers.

I suppose it all comes down to who the site is trying to primarily serve -- those asking the questions, or those coming along later with similar questions*. If the former, then people should be able to accept answers ASAP. Otherwise, the site is best served by encouraging more answers and more details in them.

* (I'm not even going to assume it's people like me, people who answer far more questions than they ask).

|improve this answer
  • 1
    "If the former, then people should be able to accept answers ASAP." -- just out of curiosity, how does it help them? – P Shved Apr 22 '10 at 16:56
2

Just because you think the answer is right doesn't mean it is. Here is an example from an hour ago where the accepted answer was wrong on both counts. If the OP had given more time for other answers to appear, it might not have been the accepted answer. Unfortunately the OP might already be off writing code that makes assumptions based on the wrong answer, and may not come back today, tomorrow, or ever to realize they've been led astray.

|improve this answer
  • Indeed. And also, even if a wrong answer somehow helps the question asker, these Q&A sites are about being good resources for future visitors who have the same question as well. For them, a wrong or less-than-perfect accepted answer is not good. – Arjan Jul 13 '13 at 12:42

You must log in to answer this question.

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