tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Answering your own question)

Dougy comments on "Answering your own question" (4875)

2010-04-21T05:27:00-07:00

Well, at the time I thought that if the Australian Maths Society publishes Ph.D. abstracts, then it's likely that other mathematical societies also do the same.

Ben Webster comments on "Answering your own question" (4842)

2010-04-19T21:16:21-07:00

I still kind of wonder: why did you ask that question? It had never occurred to me that people even would publish Ph.D. abstracts nowadays, let alone so many that one needs a list.

Dougy comments on "Answering your own question" (4840)

2010-04-19T21:01:30-07:00

I answered one of my own "big-list" questions, already knowing an answer: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/18150/which-journals-publish-phd-abstracts

Originally I didn't intend on posting it as an answer, but it says on the FAQ: "You should also request that people post one resource per answer so that it is easy for people to sort the list by voting up/down." So I added my response as an answer (to help sorting); although, this particular "big-list" turned out to be no so long.

sean tilson comments on "Answering your own question" (4711)

2010-04-11T21:02:40-07:00

I am glad i found this thread. I actually found the type of answer i was looking for shortly (1 or 2 days) after i posted my question on orientations. I have already accepted teichner's excellent answer but i was concerned how it would look to post an answer and i think having the "answer" recorded is a good thing. Thanks andrew and TK and the moderators for making the etiquette clear.

Noah Snyder comments on "Answering your own question" (4432)

2010-04-05T09:04:49-07:00

I would find it weird for people to post questions *that they already know the answer to*, but this doesn't seem to be a problem to me on MO yet. But certainly if you ask a question and then later figure out the answer you can and should post the answer. That behavior is certainly encouraged.

Harry Gindi comments on "Answering your own question" (4427)

2010-04-05T07:56:13-07:00

@TK: The point isn't that new abilities gained through reputation come with new rules regarding their use, but that the rules never stop applying. The only rules that don't apply to everyone are rules regarding privileges that some people do not yet have.

Andrew Stacey comments on "Answering your own question" (4424)

2010-04-05T07:43:07-07:00

I should make it clear that it is the basic system that has been set up to allow/encourage/reward this behaviour. It is up to us as a community as to whether or not we want to encourage this ourselves. I can foresee circumstances where this is beneficial so would not want a blanket ban, but I think it is healthy to have a discussion like this making it clear where and when this is appropriate (and where not). So I think it is good that you raised it, excellent that you did it here, and I don't think that this matter is closed.

TK comments on "Answering your own question" (4423)

2010-04-05T07:40:14-07:00

@Andrew Stacey: I see this point (even more now), and I am increasingly happy that I went to this meta forum and did not just comment on the question, and since it is encouraged I will not comment, but just try to notice myself when this happens - because I still really feel that the merits given to such questions/answers should be different, but not less in general, than questions answered by someone else. So if people are assumed to be this observant I agree with the assession that:"... the reputation system should be sufficient to distinguish these cases."

TK comments on "Answering your own question" (4421)

2010-04-05T07:24:17-07:00

@fpqc: Is this getting philosofical/overly logical/pedantic? Are you saying that if a rule contains a part saying:"this rule only applies for A, B and C" then the rule in fact applies for everybody because if your are not A, B and C you are trivially not in violation of the rule? Or am I using the word "rule" wrongly in my example which basically is: People with different reps have different liberties and thus work under different sets of rules?

My native language is not English so excuse me if I am somehow unclear or easy to misunderstand.

Andrew Stacey comments on "Answering your own question" (4420)

2010-04-05T07:19:42-07:00

Actually, this behaviour is actively encouraged. There's a badge for it, called "Self-learner", and so far it has been awarded 57 times, including to me, Ben, Anton, and Greg.

I see no problem in this, providing it is done for the "benefit of the community": namely, if an expert sees a lot of people making some trivial error then they could ask-and-answer a question on it, thus ensuring that those making the error learn of their mistake. Or if someone sees a question that they have a great answer to, but (say, in the comments) it becomes clear that the original questioner wouldn't understand the answer, or that it wasn't really the answer they were wanting.

My brief reading around stackoverflow is that this is perceived as Good Behaviour, again providing it is done for the benefit of the community and not for the benefit of the person doing it. But the reputation system should be sufficient to distinguish these cases.

Harry Gindi comments on "Answering your own question" (4417)

2010-04-05T07:07:22-07:00

Rules does not apply to everyone

I disagree. I think that the same rules should apply to everyone. The bonuses you get for reputation are perks, but rules still apply, one way or another.

By the way, to accept your own answer you must wait 48 hours.

TK comments on "Answering your own question" (4416)

2010-04-05T07:03:28-07:00

Just saw Ben Websters responce.

@Ben: I see your point on posterity, but still find the act deceiving. So I would still prefer that the general consenses was that this is frowned upon and that people will get comments for not writing that they are answering their own question - maybe it should just be a build in feature that a question answered by the author is somehow marked.

TK comments on "Answering your own question" (4415)

2010-04-05T06:55:00-07:00

@Geraldedgar: Of course something like that has happen to me (not on MO though - I am too new). As I mentioned I thought it was deceptive - more concretely the answer starts with the qoute:"That is not true. For example, ....". I myself would definitely have chosen to start along the lines of:"I just realized myself that this cant be true. For example, ...". However, after my initial shock I am somewhat relaxed now:).

@fpqc: Do you actually believe the rule or are you just being vindictive? Rules does not apply to everyone - that is what the rep-system is all about. E.g. if you have more than 10K rep then you are allowed to edit any question - and are you then allowed to answer it?

I myself think it is ok to answer your own question as long as you make it clear that you are doing so - because then readers can award merits with that in mind, and they will notice if someone does this often.

So back to my original question should I or should I not comment? I am leaning towards commenting the answer as follows:"I really believe you should make it apparant in your answer that your are answering your own question!". However, since I am new I dont want to enforce anything (that I am not certain is generally accepted) upon even newer members.

Ben Webster comments on "Answering your own question" (4414)

2010-04-05T06:22:59-07:00

If that's the incident that fpqc is refering to, then yes, the problem was that he posted a duplicate question in order to get around the fact that he had made the original one community wiki. Intentionally posting duplicate questions is a big no-no.

Answering your own question is certainly not problematic as a general maneuver; the general presumption is that this is something you would do if you posted a question, and later came up with an answer. On the other hand, I'm not sure that there is an official policy about posting a question with the intention of answering it yourself. I think we may just have not discussed the issue yet (I don't think I've seen anyone suggest it was happening before this thread). So, right, I guess we should all discuss this now.

I'm of two minds on this point. One says that this is clearly not how the system was intended to work, and in particular, having someone do this would be somewhat distracting, and take up space on the front page. On the other hand, MO is also here for posterity; if you write a question and immediately answer it, you're creating new content on the internet that has a reasonable chance of being useful to people in the future. If you want to do that, and people want to vote you up, who are we to say you shouldn't. As long as the questions are on-topic, the rest of us thinking you're a bit weird seems like about the right level of chastisement.

Regenbogen comments on "Answering your own question" (4413)

2010-04-05T05:47:35-07:00

My understanding, though I didn't participate in the hullabaloo surrounding that answer of yours, is that the issue was that you asked the same question for the second time for answering, and not that you answered your own question.

Harry Gindi comments on "Answering your own question" (4412)

2010-04-05T05:28:06-07:00

It depends on how it was done. If the answer was given several days later, then it is fine, but it it was very soon after, then it is unacceptable.

I was crucified for doing this, so I'm against it because rules should apply to everyone.

geraldedgar comments on "Answering your own question" (4408)

2010-04-05T05:15:26-07:00

I say: relax. If the same person does this repeatedly, maybe take notice. But has this never happened to you... You wrack your brains over a question for days, finally you post it somewhere, and as soon as you hit "SEND" the answer comes to you... ???

TK comments on "Answering your own question" (4407)

2010-04-05T05:05:02-07:00

Hi

Sorry if this has come up before, but I am somewhat new to MO and totally now to meta.MO and couldn't find this treated using the search option.

I just came across a somewhat easy question on MO, which had a correct answer attached to it. I read both and though:"yes.. ok.. easy question - easy answer". I then almost moved along for the next adventure, but realized that the answer was given by the same person as the question, but this was not at all evident from the answer. In fact it seemed as though the person was talking to himself in a non-trivial way.

This offended me, especially since the person was given 1 thumb up for the question and 3 thumbs up for the answer, and the answer was given within an hour of the question. I wanted to leave a comment warning others, but wasn't sure what the proper etiquette is?

I am not even sure if I should be offended? But to me it seems like an easy way to build up undeserved rep, because people may not notice this deception (my interpretation).

What is the general opinion of such behavior?