If in my eyes the answers are already good, why or what should I change? What are the expectations (MWE, documentation)? How far should explanations go?

  • 1
    I think we could do with some context here: can you point to an answer where this applies?
    – Joseph Wright Mod
    Apr 13, 2013 at 17:10
  • For instance, here the offerer just waits for better comments? tex.stackexchange.com/questions/95257/…
    – strpeter
    Apr 13, 2013 at 17:15
  • 3
    @strpeter Haha, don't worry about Karl's Students (or forgiver, or Higgs Boson or whatever the next nickname would be). It's common to offer bounties on a seemingly random basis. The idea is that rep points are useless(which I agree) so should be distributed as bounties. So it's that particular user if that's your concern. :)
    – percusse
    Apr 13, 2013 at 18:13
  • @percusse: No. The bounty I offered in the link above is not trivial. It was based on the fact that Marco Daniel's short answer seems too far from useful (at least for me) and I really need the solution that I want to apply to my project. Apr 14, 2013 at 18:41
  • 1
    @Bugbusters First trivial is not random. Second why don't you ask a new question instead of a bounty? Then you can award the bounty to the real answer that you wish to have instead of bumping already answered questions. Because you want a canonical answer not a follow-up. I don't have any problem with your bounty-award system but it is hard to promote initiative if you overdo the bounty thingy.
    – percusse
    Apr 14, 2013 at 19:08
  • @percusse: If you checked the history of Marco Daniel's answer, you would understand that bumping should not be directed to me. Re-asking almost similar question will lead to closing it as a duplicate. :-) Apr 14, 2013 at 19:24
  • @Bugbusters I know well enough to know that it's a special case. Again I don't mean to stop you, I'm just saying :) Otherwise, keep bounting :P
    – percusse
    Apr 14, 2013 at 20:31


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .