3

Background

On a comment to this answer that went through review, I selected the option to generate this comment:

This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review

I (and several other people) thought that the answer wasn't a real answer. So that is what inclined me to pick that option. However, the second part of this auto comment prompted another user to post this comment in response:

I just don't get why people so often tell a new contributor their answer ought to be a comment in the same breath they tell them they don't have enough rep to do that yet. What is Rohith supposed to do today to contribute to making a good answer?

It seems to be an outcropping of a mentality that is alienating people from this stack exchange. I never thought the second part of the auto comment could cause a controversy, but I can see the reasoning. It is like saying "you need to make this a comment, but you can't so do better". I personally am for making an answer more rigorous, but its not necessarily a requirement here, though heavily encouraged.

Question

Why does this autocomment pigeonhole new users into doing one action while specifcially mentioning "the correct" action even though they can't do it?

  • 2
    Hm. There's probably room for improvement in the review comment. However, to be fair, the comment isn't there to provide guidance on writing answers. New contributors see a popup outlining our basic expectations before they post an answer. There's probably a lot of room for improvement here as well, but new contributors have been given most information they need to "making a good answer". I'm not sure what more we can do... – yannis Aug 29 at 12:13
  • Can you add the specific thing to the title of the question? I can't suggest an edit. – bobsburner Sep 20 at 12:31
10

You'll find similar wording for across SE -- it's not specific to Politics.

The privilege to post a comment anywhere requires 50 rep. Before that you can only post comments in specific circumstances, such as replying to a comment on your own answer.

In spirit, the whole point of not allowing newcomers to comment everywhere is to silence them until they've proven that they can be valuable SE contributors. Doing so reduces the amount of noise and low value contributions on the site, and the amount of time SE users and moderators need to spend hunting down and eradicating the latter.

IMO the limit is fine as it is. Getting 50 rep is very easy. Post a few well received questions or answers and you'll get there in no time. Or do so on another site and join with a 100 rep association bonus.

Maybe the message could be improved oh so slightly more explicit. For instance: "You'll be able to comment anywhere after you've proven that you can write questions and answers that meet our community's quality standards."

In this specific case the answer was a wall of opinionated text without any sources, references, or paragraphs -- which is precisely what we don't want on this site.

  • The shared site bounty is particularly important. It makes it really easy to cross communities after showing you understand the SE ecosystem. – Jontia Aug 30 at 8:59
  • The problem with rep privileges is that this site is overrun by the alt-right. You say "GeTtInG mAnY ReP Is EaSy", but what about people who oppose the party line? At the time of writing this comment, I have less rep than I started with, despite my postive contributions! – Studoku Sep 2 at 22:43
  • 3
    @Studoku: I'm not sure I agree with your characterization of the site as being overrun by the alt-right. Only a handful of users that might match that label have any meaningful reputation. – Denis de Bernardy Sep 3 at 5:19

You must log in to answer this question.

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