1
\$\begingroup\$

This question already has an answer here:

So, to me it seems like self-answers here at Code Review are bad form. At other SE sites, if you receive answers that help you to the correct answer, normally you'll give those the credit and post your answer for your exact problem.

I know we can't control what others do and I have a down-vote button, but I ask because link removed a check-mark from an already accepted answer (not mine) to a self-answer.

Now, I'm not trying to call anyone out, but I wasn't sure if I'm correct in my assumption and whether I should comment to the user on what "bad form" is or isn't. The user doesn't seem to have a vast amount of SE history (2 months I think), and normally over on SU I'd mention something because I know a lot of new users aren't very familiar with the format of the sites.

So I guess what I'm asking is - what's the consensus here? I did see Self-answers that re-write code with little/no explanation and Self-accepting own answer when competing answers exist, but I didn't want to overstep my boundaries as a particularly (low rep) new user to Code Review, and I wasn't quite sure how a comment about that would be worded.

Sorry if this seems like a dupe, but I didn't see a canonical answer.

\$\endgroup\$

marked as duplicate by Quill, SuperBiasedMan, Community Feb 12 '16 at 21:29

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • \$\begingroup\$ It seems like what you are trying to say has already been covered under the two other Meta questions you cited. I'm not sure what your question is. Are you asking whether we can take some action against the user with the antisocial behaviour? \$\endgroup\$ – 200_success Feb 12 '16 at 9:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ Selfies are not inherently bad form. Each answer should be judged on its' merits, regardless of who wrote it. In this case, it is a bad answer, which has been flagged as such. The identity of the author is irrelevant. \$\endgroup\$ – Kaz Feb 12 '16 at 10:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @200_success I guess I wasn't sure what the canonical answer is, I don't want to do anything, only inform if there was a canonical answer. It doesn't matter. \$\endgroup\$ – Raystafarian Feb 12 '16 at 21:32
2
\$\begingroup\$

In the specific case you linked, it should be altered to become a comprehensive review. That, or deleted. Sounds mean, but what we create here is reviews, not improved code. That the code improves as a result of the review is nice, but there's also reviews like "Your code is perfectly fine".

Nobody learns from "This is version A. This is version B. B is better" - it's too much to memorize and not universally applicable. For 20+ lines of code, it just needs explanation as to why it's better, because otherwise it is an near impossible task to look at version C and judge which is better of versions A B and C in short order. You'd have to do the reviewing yourself, and you might not be able to.

\$\endgroup\$

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