Yesterday I asked the question ¿Cuándo se usa “aparte” y cuándo “a parte”?. I knew the answer (Gorpik had explained it to me just before), but I felt that adding a proper question and having a proper answer would benefit more people with the same question.

This lead to some debate about how appropriate is to create questions like this, which can be very much summarized with Gorpik's comment:

En otros sitios de Stack Exchange se anima a introducir este tipo de preguntas y que incluso quien las hace sea quien las responda. El objetivo es tener un foro en que quien busque una respuesta la encuentre. Otra cosa es que tal vez sea bueno convertir estas preguntas en community wiki.

So my questions here are:

  • Is it good to post questions with the purpose to create general knowledge and get more and more people interested in the site?
  • If so, what about creating a list of them and keep encouraging people to ask them and post [community wiki] answers with good detail?
| |

As I wrote in the comment fedorqui quotes, other Stack Exchange sites (including Stack Overflow, which is the original) encourage experienced users to add interesting questions and then answer them themselves so that they can be later searched and found by other users looking for answers. I think this is a good policy and makes for a better site.

I also think it is a good idea to turn these questions and answers into community wiki, so we dispel any thought of using them for repwhoring.

One of the aims of Stack Exchange forums is becoming the one stop place for getting answers on the topic dealt with at each of them. This is why we encourage questions and answers that will be useful for future site visitors. This kind of questions work towards this aim.

| |
  • 1
    Couldn't agree more. By the way, I checked and it is not possible to make a question be community wiki anymore (reference), so it is just the answer which can be wiki. – fedorqui 'SO stop harming' Oct 28 '15 at 13:01

I was going to comment on gorpik's excellent insight, to which I fundamentally agree, but my comment got too long, so I decided to turn it into another answer to point out some other things.

  1. It's funny all the "repwhoring" thing. After all, Stack Exchange is gamified, and if I get too cynical I could say that for a good percentage of the questions someone is just letting someone else do their googling for them. Let's take into account that reputation/badges can also be a reward for the time invested in at least, typing, and that the community should be mature enough to reward (or downvote) according to the value added to the site, not based on who is asking/answering or if they seem to be doing it just for reputation.

    So, my concern is not that users would do stuff just for reputation, as long as what they do brings value to the site. The problem could be if by doing so, they do the opposite, and get in the way of people learning, make this site a less friendly/welcoming place, post tons of silly questions, etc. Still, moderators could help to make alleviate the consequences of this behavior.

  2. Also, we should not forget that users seem not to vote that much here. I can't recall when was the last time I saw an answer getting more than 7 votes, much less 10 (which gives you a badge...). The same goes for questions, but usually questions get fewer votes than the answers. So I think that any user doing anything in this site just for reputation will think sooner or later that is not that "worth it".

  3. We are in beta, and one of the things that we would like in order to move forward is actually, more questions. All our statistics look good, except that we really want more questions (we are not even considered a "healthy" beta) and having more answers per question could not hurt.

  4. (And this point is an edit) If I read the reasons why questions can no longer be CW it seems that Stack Exchange really wants to moderate and encourage valuable content based on reputation winnings/loss (no big surprise here). So it would be a little bit hypocritical that questions can't be CW (so OP are hold accountable of what they post via their rep) but then they were force to have a CW answer so they don't gain reputation and don't do stuff for reputation. That, to me, seems to be against the whole gamification strategy/approach for the site.

So, if we keep ourselves to our policy of using votes to reward good content and moderate via comments and downvotes (we know that it is usually good to comment when giving a downvote to explain why we did so and waht is wrong with the post) there should be no problem with "answering your own question", which the site explicitly enpurages. Marking it as "community wiki" should be the user's choice, not something that we can/should coerce users into, or we would be making this site a less friendly place and maybe discouraging some valuable contributions.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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