Fighting answers in comments! [duplicate]

Question

There is an astonishing amount of answers in comments here. Some of them gathered around 20 to 50 upvotes, and clearly provide a partial or full answer - and that isn't what the stack is for!

What got me started was this full and correct answer in comments that has since become obsolete (and deleted as of around 2018-10-03 17:50):

I find the two answers in comments rude. I flagged them repeatedly because they are showing a "My answer is above the Voting system". They are still there. They are obsolete. They break the guideline on comments that they shall not provide (patial) answers. They are answers in comments which game the system (quality control).

And there are Many More Examples - Questions in Strory ID that don't have answers but tons of answer attempts in the comments. One unanswered one is here:

One could have tried it with an answer and then discuss the merits of these answers on the actual answer, not having to rely on the not QCed comments.

Same problem here:

WHY shouldn't we?!

Comments don't have any Quality Control but only upvotes. One can't show that an comment is wrong or comment on it he way one could on an answer. One can't improve on it. One can't correct it. Or add reasoning that was missingfrom a bad answer.

Comments are meant to give a hint to the right direction or request clarification, they are not meant to replace answers or answer attempts. But this happens, especially in the story-identification. Indeed, most questions in story-identification only have a single answer that was weeded out via the comments first. This is not how the stack is supposed to work based on the help files.

An answer attempt, even a wrong one, warrants an answer on its own! A wrong answer can be discussed why it is not the right answer on its own.

A different thing arises: these comments often become obsolete and then create distracting space between the question and the answers.

Do you want to know more?

The Main Meta site has some dozen discussions about answers in comments, and they all lead to the same thing: "DON'T do it!" For example

• Hey you. Yeah, you! Post your answers as answers, not comments

Then there is the general help center (shared among all stacks), which tells us:

When should I comment?

You should submit a comment if you want to:

• Request clarification from the author;
• Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;
• Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).

When shouldn't I comment?

Comments are not recommended for any of the following:

• Suggesting corrections that don't fundamentally change the meaning of the post; instead, make or suggest an edit;
• Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one);
• Compliments which do not add new information ("+1, great answer!"); instead, up-vote it and pay it forward;
• Criticisms which do not add anything constructive ("-1, see previous comments you scallywag!"); instead, down-vote (and provide or up-vote a better answer if appropriate);
• Secondary discussion or debating a controversial point; please use chat instead;
• Discussion of community behavior or site policies; please use meta instead.

_{(emphasis added)}

Other stacks have a very hard stance on answers in comments. For example the RPG.SE has a zero-tolerance policy towards it, and even made a Q&A on it. Or two. Or ten.

Other sites, like Math, drive a slightly less harsh course, but even there, it is not accepted.

What this is not:

This is not a question why people answer in comments, it ismeant to remind people tha answering in comments is not the way to go.

The edge between comment and answer here is wider than on other stacks, but Answers in comments are still outside of how the stack works: you can't downvote a comment.

Do your Part!

Now I ask of you: DO YOUR PART! Join Mobile Answer-as-Comment-Hunters Now! Burn the heretic; Kill the mutant; Purge the unclean. Go forth and hoist the flags of the inquisition, mount the flags on the sinner's contents. Turn their contents into answers and earn the Karma they don't want if you like, but credit where credit is due!

Make the SF&F.SE a better place today! For a cleaner future of the stack!

Fun Fact

Everybody started to derail and in some parts discuss in comments on this, which is again not what comments are for as of help file. The discussion moved to chat.

Answer 1

I think there's another part of the help center information on comments that deserves to be in bold face. You emphasized a when not to point, but there is a when to point above it:

• Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post

Each stack has some autonomy in how they decide to enforce certain rules, and which guidelines they hold to higher or lower standards. Science Fiction and Fantasy Stack Exchange has a history of realizing that some users are aware of or have better access to the niche information of our different geekeries and nerddoms. Or recognizing that not everyone always has the time or expertise to know if the information they have is truly relevant, or if the OP has seen it before or not. There's a myriad of other justifications, which commentary here and on other posts has brought up.

So, there tends to be more "relevant but minor" or "transient" information available under our posts. We don't necessarily consider those to be answers. And that doesn't mean that our posts want for real answers, or that our site quality suffers because of it. We have a high number of questions per day for a non-technical stack, an active user base, and some of the highest reputation users on the network.

When looking at comments, then, I'd suggest evaluating whether or not we consider the information within minor or not. Although we already have a soft policy of allowing certain answering within comments, I'd argue that we don't really allow full-stop answers, but we do weight the idea of "relevant but minor" information a bit higher than other stacks.

Even in the example question/comment, it seems that analysis there was more of an English analysis, which didn't seem to be the point of the question. The comment also didn't stop there being not only a large number of answers, but one with over 100 upvotes(!) and a large bounty. And comments on some of those answers were definitely done "properly", asking for or providing clarification. None of the concerns about potential harm to the experience of commenting or answering or voting really seem to have held up.

It's difficult to build a full model to analyze whether that holds up true in all cases, but in my experience it holds true much more often than not. Adding extra information in comments has not been a detriment to our site. It has not robbed anyone of reputation, cheated the voting or review systems. On the contrary, I have found that others have used that information to successfully write their own answers or improve them, myself included (I admit to confirmation bias there, but there are other community members that have indicated the same).