I want to know if we can add a new feature to automatically lock questions within a few minutes of an answer being accepted. It has been my experience that rarely, if ever, anything constructive comes after an accept. Either people start posting answers even after an accept, or post comments that go off topic or challenge the answer (usually erroneously), or things just get out of hand with random discussion.

I understand thanks to the first answer I got where this would be an issue. My question then would be, does anyone have any ideas of how we can prevent the above scenario as I seem to encounter it frequently?

  • If you're going to downvote would you mind explaining? – anon May 22 '11 at 0:57
  • 6
    @Ascension Downvotes on meta mean disagreement with your proposal. See my answer for a potential explanation. – Adam Lear May 22 '11 at 1:00
  • 1
    @Ascension, ranting doesn't add anything useful to your proposal. You'll just collect downvotes and detract from your nominal point. – Michael Petrotta May 22 '11 at 1:03
  • 2
    -1 because this would prevent me from getting some more Necromancer badges. – BalusC May 22 '11 at 1:35
  • Thanks everyone for your input I think the real issue here is proper moderation. My suggestion came from the fact that I've endured many situations where people have erroneously attacked my answers. It's not that in itself that is the issue, it's the quality of the comments I get. They should be moderated better. For example, I just finally gave in to a guy who posted over 20 comments attacking my answer and me personally, and sunk to his level and said some things offside and my account has been suspended. Frustration with not knowing what to do is what lead to this poor suggestion. – anon May 22 '11 at 1:40
  • 1
    I frequently post answers after an accept. They're usually damn good answers. Sometimes they get a bunch of upvotes, and eventually become the accepted answer. This site is not a forum: questions do not get "closed" just because they've been answered by one person. However, if you ever find yourself upset about them, just let me know. I'll be happy to delete them from any of your questions. – Cody Gray May 22 '11 at 8:14

Let's discuss your scenarios point by point.

people start posting answers EVEN AFTER AN ACCEPT

This is perfectly normal. As long as the new answer answers the question, it is permitted even if it is posted a year later. Late answers are sometimes the best answers.

or post comments that go off topic

Off-topic comments that are not offensive can either be responded too by saying that it is not relevant to the question or the answer or it can simply be ignored. If it is offensive, flag the comment.

or challenge the answer (usually erroneously)

Challenging the answer is an essential part of the system. However, the answerer is not obligated to respond to comments. Nor is the questioner obligated to justify the accepted answer. If the comments are not courteous and not relevant to the question, flag the comment.

or things just get out of hand with random discussion

If random comments are occurring between two parties other than the questioner and the answerers, flag the comments.

The bottom line is that there is a difference between annoying and offensive. When annoying things happen in questions that you participate in, it makes it less enjoyable to ask or answer questions. But even when this happens, what is annoying to you is less annoying to people who can benefit from the question and its answers. They skim over the annoying parts and aren't bothered by them.

It's easy to say but just try to get a thicker skin and if you don't think you can flag anything then just try to let it go and move on to the next question or answer. When you are tempted to reply to a baiting comment, just let it go. It's hard when you want to put somebody in their place but life is too short and you have better things to do.

|improve this answer|||||
  • "life is too short and you have better things to do" Amen to that brother that is my problem, I need to let the bs slide. I'll mark your question correct as you seem to have the most insight into where I'm coming from. Everyone else has posted insightful answers/comments and I thank them too btw. – user159773 May 22 '11 at 2:16

I am against this proposed change.

Locking a question prevents new answers and voting on it, which quite frankly would be unfair to the asker.

There are also situations where the accepted answer is either plain wrong or insufficient, or a mediocre answer was accepted quickly and someone else came along with a better answer later.

If you have a problem with a specific user, you should report that problem by flagging an offending post for moderator attention. If you think an answer is not helpful, the correct behaviour is to downvote that answer and potentially leave a comment explaining how it could be improved. Auto-locking questions is not a solution to either of those problems.

|improve this answer|||||
  • I can see your point and this is valid. I agree that downvoting and reporting SHOULD be the answer, but it isn't. These things persist regardless to the point that I have no interest in contributing anymore. I downvoted these people and when the moderator came in to clean up their mess, he/she also removed my downvotes. So I'm completely frustrated with this. Yes I am referencing a specific situation but this post is about the fact that this is consistently an issue for me. However again I do appreciate your input and you make a completely valid point. Any other ideas? – user159773 May 22 '11 at 1:03
  • 1
    @Ascension: mods cannot remove downvotes. Only the system can, and will, if it deems your downvote patterns suspicious. – ЯegDwight May 22 '11 at 1:40
  • Thanks for that insight RegDwight. As I said in a comment above in this situation I caved to an attack and said/did some things offside so I guess this is where the system kicked in. – user159773 May 22 '11 at 1:42

You appear to have misunderstood the meaning of acceptance.

It means the asker (often the person with the least understanding of the pros and cons of the issue) has decided to go with that particular answer.

Fine. That's nice.

But the crowd-sourced evaluation of the options can and should go on.

|improve this answer|||||

You must log in to answer this question.