Possible Duplicate:
Vote to force-accept an answer for someone else's question

The fact is that we can't trust new users to accept answers when their problem is solved.

Sometimes the OP even adds a comment saying "Thanks, that solved my problem!" but it never accepts the answer and also never comes back. This is really frustrating.

My suggestion is that users who own a silver tag-specific badge (that is being used on the question) should be allowed to cast a vote to Accept an answer. Pretty much the same way we do it to close/reopen a question.

marked as duplicate by gnostradamus, squillman, waiwai933, user27414, Robert Harvey Apr 18 '11 at 17:06

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
  • 1
    Isn't it a little ironic that NONE of the questions linked as duplicates have actually an accepted answer? – Aleadam Apr 18 '11 at 17:14
  • 1
    This is obviously not a duplicate. This is a different approach. – Lance Roberts Apr 18 '11 at 17:31
  • 5
    @Lance: different solution, same non-issue. How many different solutions do we need to post the same "this is by-design" answers to? – Shog9 Apr 18 '11 at 17:54
  • 1
    @Shog9, one idea per question seems about the right ratio. – Lance Roberts Apr 18 '11 at 17:56
  • 5
    @Lance: same idea. It's always the same idea. It's always been the same idea. "Accepted" means one thing and one thing only: the OP clicked the checkmark. Doesn't mean "best answer", doesn't mean "Community's choice", doesn't mean "The One True Answer By Which All Others Will Be Measured"... These aren't even feature-requests, they're [support] - because if their authors had bothered to read the numerous previous discussions, they would already know this and wouldn't be blindly proposing solutions to a problem that doesn't exist. So we close as duplicates. – Shog9 Apr 18 '11 at 18:00
  • From my point of view, a Q&A site that has a question that has been successfully answered but that wasn't marked as so, its a problem. It's a problem because the entire site is based on a reputation system that relies almost exclusively on the kindness of our hearts. Many of us collaborate because of it. Including me. Watching several of my answers go unnoticed is really frustrating because I actually spend my personal time to stay here helping others. This is a real problem and we should find a way to deal with it. – karlphillip Apr 18 '11 at 20:58
  • @Shog9, It should have been a feature-request, since that's what it is. And for the record, I disagree with this idea, and think gnostradamus had the best link, the one to Robert's answer. – Lance Roberts Apr 18 '11 at 21:12
  • @lance: then I'm still not understanding why you want this re-opened. What value is there in scattering or duplicating responses to this all over the site? Robert did write a good answer - to another duplicate! If someone wants to address the responses to the previous proposals, they'll have laid the groundwork to propose something new... But this makes no attempt to do so. – Shog9 Apr 18 '11 at 21:39
  • @karl: some users are ingrates. This suggestion won't solve that. However, you can already vote to reward other users for their hard work - just... up-vote their answer! No acceptance needed. – Shog9 Apr 18 '11 at 21:41
  • @Shog9, I think it should be open and status-declined if need be, because it is a new feature request. I'm sure we could look historically and find different feature-requests on the same root issue with different solutions. While I don't agree that this is a problem we need to find a solution for, I do think that if we did want to solve it, that this looks like the best idea yet. We shouldn't close or delete posts we disagree with, we should downvote them (on Meta), or answer them appropriately or both. – Lance Roberts Apr 19 '11 at 0:13
  • @Lance: I don't disagree with the solution. It's a fine solution, almost as good as giving just about anyone the power to vote for their favorite answer (which is to say, the solution that has existed since Stack Overflow was first introduced into private beta). If we're supposed to take these "solutions" seriously, we seriously need a better description of the problem - that is, one that clearly indicates why it is a problem. Until then... – Shog9 Apr 19 '11 at 0:23
  • 1
    Several years later, dozens of other users (including me) are still trying to debate this issue. I really hope SO staff will consider the idea eventually. meta.stackoverflow.com/q/354584/534406 – BoffinBrain Aug 6 '17 at 22:09

If a user holds a silver tag-badge for that topic, it is quite likely that they also answered that question about that topic, meaning that there is a potential conflict of interest. They may vote for their answer to be accepted, even if there is another which may be slightly better.

  • 5
    A simpler approach would be to deny/prevent users that answered the question to vote for an accepted answer. – karlphillip Apr 18 '11 at 16:45
  • @karlphillip: Then you're depleting the pool of potential people who could vote to accept. For niche tags with low traffic, your suggestion could therefore end up being completely useless (i.e. all the people who could vote to accept have answered). – gnostradamus Apr 18 '11 at 17:01

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