Always be succinct, here is an example:
provide details that are direct and to the point
Don't include personal bias nor opinion, these are not facts
Supply facts (not googled cr*p) that are correct - research it from reputable sites
Good luck, and this last statement is somewhat verbose :)
This post compares 2019 to 2018, considering only the sites created before the beginning of 2018, so that year-to-year comparison is meaningful. Deleted posts were included by the query.
The 2018 numbers are not exactly the same as in the post comparing 2017 to 2018, because the set of sites being compared is slightly different.
The primary goal/vision around here was (or is, depending on who you ask): to create high quality content for future readers on scale.
Sure: the rules that were derived from to enable that goal make it hard for new users to ask "good" "on topic" questions. Even experienced users have problems with that (my personal two cent: I found it much harder to get to ...
Yes, a closed question cannot have any bounties; conversely, it's impossible to close a question with an active bounty. AFAIK this is because bounties are mainly aimed at getting new answers; almost all text in the help center articles seem to imply this.
When should I place a bounty?
In order to get good answers, you have to put effort into the ...
If a question can not be answered within site rules, it is more efficient to lock the question than deleting each individual answer.
Locking the question also communicates to the question author why they are not getting an answer.
And of course we have rules for answers. It's just they are not broken nearly as often (among other things because people ...
These rules are mostly about protecting the question asker and to some extent the rest of the community as a whole.
Other related issues are prohibitions on personal medical advice and homework help that would allow a student to complete an assignment without actually learning anything.
Two related answers:
If we allow these questions to remain open, they ...
My advice is not to overthink this.
Just pick the answer that helped you the most, and accept it. Then upvote any other answer you found useful. Don't forget to downvote any answer that wasn't. Then give back by answering things and reviewing things and continuing to ask interesting questions.
It is also possible to give bounties to reward exceptional ...
That is really subjective. When you have the feeling that some answer solves your problem, then sure, accept it. You see, even when you later find: "err, it doesn't work, you can always un-accept". Or when a different, "better" answer comes in, you simply move the accept.
Your decision is not cast in stone!
Of course it might be useful to add a comment "...
When you can't test it, there's no point in accepting it. Accepting an answer simply means that the OP received an answer that worked for them personally; therefore, since you can't test it, it hasn't really helped you.
Formally, you can use any criteria you like to accept an answer. So your question is really about the most sensible way to decide.
If there's no prospect of you ever testing any other answer either, you might as well accept the one that seems most likely to answer your question.
Even if you can only test it later, it's reasonable to accept an answer for ...