I had bad experience on codereview.stackexchange.com. Someone told me "You have been told to do this ..." as if that guy is a master and I am a servant.

To avoid all this in future, I have decided to include the following lines in my future posts for code review:

  • While writing code review / comments to me, please be civil as you are with your colleagues at work.

  • Please don't use insulting/demeaning words/phrases/sentences otherwise I will disregard your answer.

  • I may or may not follow the advice given in the code review. This may happen because of many reasons - the advice is not correct, or I don't agree with the advice because of some reasons, or there is a better advice than the one given, or I don't want to do it because I don't have time for this, or I don't want to do it because it is more work than I expected, etc. So, please don't review my code if you expect that I will/should follow your advice.

It is quite possible that no one will review my code, but that's much better than getting demeaned.

If someone else also had bad experience on codereview.stackexchange.com, then, if they want, they can also include the lines that I wrote above in their posts.

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ No, please don't do that. Meta information like this does not belong in posts. It belongs in comments. \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 10:27
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Did you flag the offending comments? \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 10:30
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Perhaps add some more examples and how they ought to have been phrased? \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 10:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ Instead of "You have been told", it should be "You have been suggested". The word "told" should be replaced by the word "suggested". \$\endgroup\$
    – user245050
    Apr 22 at 11:43
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Can you be more specific about this, @Amit? I searched through the two questions you've posted and didn't find the word "told" in any of the answers. \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 12:36
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ "You have been suggested" doesn't make any grammatical sense (an action can be suggested, but not a person). Did you mean "advised" there? \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 12:37
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @TobySpeight Many, many comments were not worth salvaging and have been removed. \$\endgroup\$
    – Mast Mod
    Apr 22 at 13:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ Toby, I basically meant - "It has/had been suggested to you". \$\endgroup\$
    – user245050
    Apr 22 at 14:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ As Mast said, those comments were removed. \$\endgroup\$
    – user245050
    Apr 22 at 14:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ Okay, I hadn't realised it might be in an old comment. I thought you were referring to actual answers. \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 15:21
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ For context, this question has 42 removed comments. One of them: "Did you read what you have been told many times already? Errors must be logged. In the error log. Where you can find them any time of day." \$\endgroup\$
    – Mast Mod
    Apr 22 at 15:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Since people have said that I should not write the 3 points that I mentioned in my original post in my code review posts (and those points might get edited out), I have decided to not post any more code on codereview.stackexchange.com for review. My experience on codereview.stackexchange.com was quite bad and stressful. \$\endgroup\$
    – user245050
    Apr 24 at 7:44

2 Answers 2


No, there is no good reason to add such clutter to your questions, and it would likely be edited out.

Code Review (like all Stack Exchange sites) already has a "be nice" policy. If you are more sensitive than that policy provides for, you might want to re-think your participation. It would be unfortunate to lose you, but that might be the least-bad option.

If you receive answers or comments that violate the policy, please flag them for a moderator to deal with.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Thanks @Ian - I hadn't noticed it was to a different meta site. Still applies here, though. \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 15:20
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Amit, I think you're attacking a perception there - I should probably have written "sensitive to word choice" or something. Anyway, I find it helps to assume that people here mean well, and that their command of English might not be as good as yours (or that they may be from a different culture where the words don't have the same connotations). Please don't assume that people intend to demean you, especially if they have volunteered to help you improve your code. I find that Code Review members pretty much always prefer cooperation to conflict! \$\endgroup\$ Apr 22 at 15:26

My 2c:

In my experience, it does indeed occur that

  1. a question is posted;
  2. an answer is posted containing extensive suggestions;
  3. a follow-up question is posted that shows low evidence of having learned from the first answer;
  4. rinse and repeat.

None of this justifies a compromise to the "be nice" policy in either direction. As an answerer my eventual policy is to drop a comment on the most recent question stating, basically,

  • If the suggestions in the answer to the previous question have not been understood, please ask for clarification there rather than pushing on with no adjustments.
  • If you disagree with the suggestions in that answer, it's important - both there and probably in the context of this question - to explain why they were not followed.
  • The way this question chain is headed, there's diminishing value in me attempting an answer since it seems that content has no impact on your code. There is a risk that this becomes true for other potential answerers as well.

To summarise: if you're coming to Code Review seeking feedback, you should be (to at least some extent) receptive to that feedback; otherwise why post at all? But this is still no excuse for verbal harassment.

As to your suggested boilerplate, leave that out. The first two points are implied by the terms of service, and the last point is far too vague: rather than "This may happen because of many reasons", you would want to explain for this particular case why your current design has not followed previous advice.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Amit It's not the intention's clarity that's the problem; it's the intent itself. It's basically never compatible with the aims of this site that you ask for someone to avoid reviewing your code, regardless of the reason. \$\endgroup\$
    – Reinderien
    May 5 at 13:27

You must log in to answer this question.