Because deletion of accepted answers has been rejected (and so has been transferring accepted answer status to other answers), I propose an alternative: posters should be able to waive placement of their accepted answers at the top, putting them equal to self-accepted answers. The accepted answers would still show their characteristic green checkmarks.

For example, this would be useful on Stack Overflow when a poster's accepted answer is not blatantly wrong but determined to be likely to mislead novice coders only after its acceptance. He can waive his right to the top answer space; then others can upvote the best competing answer (or downvote the accepted answer) to improve the quality of the answer list.


If an answer is "determined to be likely to mislead novice coders", why can't the answerer just edit their question to not do that? If they're already trying to protect users from their answer via your proposed opt-out mechanism, why not just change the answer so they don't have to?

At the very least, they can just put warnings and caveats around the stuff that may be considered "dangerous", but the better option is to just make the answer not dangerous.

| improve this answer | |

If you flag your own answer and provide a convincing case, you could get a moderator to delete your own accepted answer. This would be for scenarios like, as you propose, your answer is so horribly and blatantly wrong that it no longer deserves to exist and you can't revise the answer as suggested by Daniel DiPaolo.

As this is a very rare kind of situation to need this, I think this is probably a lot more effective than introducing entirely new functionality in the system for such a rare case.

| improve this answer | |

You must log in to answer this question.

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