I have some poorly received posts. Should I kill my account? Should I make all my posts say
user227432 with no link?
Note: I'm going to be a bit pedantic in this answer and point out things that could be considered problematic by some of the users. The reality may or may not be as harsh, but please consider it all carefully. None if it is personal, none of it is an attack. And whatever you do, read our FAQ on asking questions. It was written by people smarter than me and their advice is worth gold.
First of all, it is rarely necessary to kill an account simply because a post was ill-received. I don't know how many posts you've removed, but from a quick glance I can spot 3 questions and 1 self-deleted answer (scoring 0). Of those 3 questions, all questions are answered and only 1 is closed (scoring -4). The other 2 have a positive score, one of them has a single downvote. Let's focus on the closed one, your most recent question.
You could've been more responsive to the comments left on your questions. It is quite possible people have given you the benefit of the doubt during the first 2 questions and decided against doing that with the 3rd. All 3 questions are after all not great questions and I would've understood if the others had been closed as well for lack of description and context. It was also posted only hours after the 2nd question. That by itself is poor practice (You can't have fully understood the answer, its effects, written a good second version and properly tested that in such a small amount of time. Besides, more answers may have been on their way.), but it's made worse by how you wrote your 3rd question. Let's start with the title:
How can I represent a given memory pattern in C, rather than a mathematical value, for endian-independant code?
Does that sound descriptive to you? It doesn't to me. It doesn't sound like a request for review either. It sounds like a feature-request. We don't do those.
The site standard is for the title to simply state the task accomplished by the code.
After the title, you begin with this:
Again, still trying to interpret a boolean value from an input string.
Do. Or do not. There is no try.
This is your 2nd question on the topic and Code Review requires working code. So we all assume your new version is working better than the first. And the first should've been fine already. Your phrase sounds fatalistic, after a title that doesn't fit our scope. This means you've left a bad impression and the rest of the question is fighting an uphill battle to convince reviewers your question is fit for the site and worth their time.
So we have a poorly specified task with a poorly phrased question and then we encounter this:
How can I create integer literals, by memory layout rather than by value? I am trying to write the fastest possible string interpretation algorithm possible.
Again, a feature-request. And more ambiguity. The question was closed since it looks like it wasn't ready yet for review.
"the fastest possible string interpretation algorithm possible"
We all want to write fast code. But why are you re-inventing the wheel here? It looks like you're cutting corners and sacrificing safety for performance. This is pointed out by multiple answers. What in your specification is so speed-critical that this is the way to go about it? That's completely unclear, since we have no specification. c is quite a dangerous language to go fast-and-loose with.
A good question has a problem statement (the problem solved by the program). A specification, a description. Preferably both. A piece of code showing the example usage helps a lot with that, as do test cases.
Remember, all we know about your code and your project is what you tell us about it. We can't look in your head.