As a moderator, I deleted thousands of comments and left many links to chat for people to follow. I've had to apply off-topic comments locks to many posts to get comments to stop. Unfortunately, as this question clearly explains, this is not without consequences, which made me very reluctant to lock otherwise good posts in all but the most extreme cases.
For Stack Overflow, this SEDE query returns that 26% of the posts with a downvote don't have a comment. 11% of the downvoted posts that are scoring less than zero don't have any comment.
Here is the source query
select sum(case when p.commentcount = 0 then 1 else 0 end) nocomment
, sum(case when p.commentcount > 0 then 1 else 0 end) comments
This is a massive amount of effort for something that really doesn't require any change.
If somebody has posted some version of your answer in a comment, post your answer anyways. That's it.
If you feel like helping keep the site clean, flag their comment as "no longer needed" afterwards, so a moderator can delete it.
As the author and prolific user of one of the user scripts that leaves canned comments (though this one deliberately prefixes the comment with "Hi user12986714"), let me tell you this: in roughly 10% of the cases I use it, the author of the question posts a comment apologizing for posting their question in the wrong place. In another ~20%, the author deletes ...
It seems so; I've just flagged such a comment here as No Longer Needed with my sockpuppet and it was instantly deleted. I see no reason why it should be, other than that the username contains a dirty word.
M. Afrashteh is the author of the comment (and of the question); their username doesn't play any role here
@KshitijSingh is mentioned in the ...
You're under no requirement to explain your downvote in any case. The popup is a suggestion, telling you that you can explain your downvote if you think that the post can be improved. If someone else has already covered why it's downvote-worthy in a comment - great! You don't need to comment.
It's also worth bearing in mind that leaving a comment saying &...
The best way to react is to be judgemental. We're using the wisdom of crowds here and you're part of the crowd.
Remember that you're helping everyone by doing that. Why waste the time of all the people who might try the answer and find it leads them astray.
Your power is a single downvote per post, if there are others that disagree, your downvote is easily ...
The Help Center says:
Choose one answer that you believe is the best solution to your problem.
So it's entirely up to you.
Stack Exchange is not about who gives the fastest answer, it's a library of detailed answers to every question about certain topics. It's fine to accept a later, more complete answer, even though it may have drawn inspiration from ...
I think the best way is to delete your own comments first because:
You can, and you are already reviewing the comments on that post
That makes the other comments obviously unnecessary and easy for moderators to delete when flagged to review them
Doing it the other way means moderators may spend more time trying to figure out whether they really are ...
I talked to Carla, who's leading the work interpreting the responses we get from the Site Satisfaction survey and she was able to give me some info for you. Responses were added to this group if they were about:
General frustrations with commenting
Too many unhelpful comments
Inability to comment (due to rep)
Answers in comments
This excludes ...
No, this doesn't sound as a feature we would need.
some deleted comments do add value to the post either directly or indirectly which a few people might fail to notice
Well, if comments add value then that value should be moved into the post. If not done by the OP, then by any other user that stumbles upon that comment.
If enough flags can delete a ...
Depends a bit on the context.
Glorfindel makes a good point in his answer about 'thanks, done, edited' comments too:
There's one caveat: the 'Done' comment might ping the author of the first comment (either directly, or because the only comments are by the author of the post and the author of the first comment); if the comment is deleted before they visit ...
Don't post code as comments in the first place. Edit it into your question or answer instead.
The purpose of comments is for requests for clarification. If you don't use them as intended then as you've seen they aren't a good fit.
In such a case I think you should ignore the pop-up, and upvote the comment which matches your reason for downvoting.
Both upvoting and downvoting are intended to be anonymous, and so I do not think there is any need to try and link a downvoter or upvoter to their vote.
Consider upvoting if you found my answer helpful
Even that is already problematic (as a comment, or as final sentence of a post). It's fine to educate new users about voting/accepting, but you are not a new user and your profile shows you're aware of how the voting functionality works. Comments are meant to improve the post, not to earn more reputation. ...
Blacklisting specific words from posts or comments to a point where they can not be posted or will be automatically deleted after posting will only 'move the problem', people will only get more creative in their ways to still post their one-up comments.*
A system-level blacklist will only make people write more creative comments trying to ...
Should I refrain from flagging "didn't downvote" comments if they came with constructive criticism?
Since this is one of the intended purposes of comments:
Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;
unless the post has been edited to address that criticism, the comment is useful and it should not be flagged. "...
Comments are a Zen exercise, at least on this network. They come, they go. Do not attach yourself to them.
If you consider your content "worthy" to stay on that question/answer then the answer is to "dig deeper" and to identify enough more helpful information so that you can submit your input as another answer that (also) addresses the ...
It seems awfully convenient that do be able to ask a clarification or an update, one should have already answered a bunch of unrelated questions.
That is correct and on-purpose. The goal of any Stack Exchange site is to be a body of knowledge in the form of Questions and their Answers. No chit-chat, no distractions.
Assuming one answers 10 or 20 questions ...
It's worth noting that something like this is already implemented in Stack Overflow for Teams, so it shouldn't be too difficult to implement it on the main sites as well.
In addition, when you're writing a comment, it'll show you if a ping will notify the person by highlighting the ping when you write the comment.
This could be useful on the main site for ...
1I posted a comment yesterday on an answer pointing out that the answer had mostly strayed from the topic in my question and requesting that the user actually answer the question I had asked. The answer has not been updated but my comment has been deleted.
As mentioned by other's in comments your comment seems to be overly demanding, and doesn't bring more ...
Not sure on the state of plugins for editing (I don't think edit is an option right now), but I went ahead and made the edit for you.
<cctype> and <ctype.h>
... passed through just fine (as expected).
It certainly is for the Person writing the Text, otherwise he wouldn't have wasted his time.
That can be true, but especially for the problematic newbie questions it is not sufficient to only look at it from this perspective.
Zero efforts "here my homework now drop solution. Asap. Please" are a complete waste of time for readers. And the questioner ...
I would be against being able to edit those comments, as that leaves an obvious way to abuse the system to circumvent the reputation requirement for commenting.
Being able to delete such comment could be helpful, but we would need to set a rep limit greater then 1 to prevent banned users making use of this "new feature".
Therefor I would propose to ...
[sic] means exactly so or verbatim and usually is used to point out an authors inability of correct writing.
It's often enough abused just to exhibit a person, and that's a thing going ad hominem and violates the code of conduct.
So unless in a linguistic or otherwise technical context you shouldn't use it.
We do actually have a boilerplate template for rude comments, not always accompanied by a suspension.
I participate in a site where people are very sensitive about... well, everything.
Is not a very useful place to start from, if you're assuming everyone is oversensitive to start with.
I'd also add that comments are never meant to be permanent artifacts. ...
It's not possible to do it faster; according to The Complete Rate-Limiting Guide you
Can only delete own comments under 20 posts per day (multiple comments under same post are treated as one)
This limit applies to both the API and the regular site. Per-app exceptions to the rate limits haven't been made before; the only exceptions I know of are increased ...
While there is some difference between stars and comment upvotes, the benefit of retaining the information about comment upvotes while transferring them to chat outweighs the drawbacks:
the information is not lost in the first place.
the comment votes are an essential part of a [supposedly healthy] discussion which happened to be in the comments, and if ...
I agree with meager's answer regarding your suggestions being a lot of effort for something which I, at least, don't believe is a sufficiently major problem.
If I see a comment which basically answers the question, I sometimes comment to this person to suggest they post an answer, which they have quite often done. Alternatively, if they don't give an answer ...