Once you add an answer to a question, there is always the option to add another answer. What would be the purpose of adding a new second answer versus just editing your original answer?
1446
When is it okay to post two answers to one question?
15323
I have a question about editing practices:  Does it look good to edit a question you have just answered?  For example: say I had just answered a question, then saw that the question had some minor formatting issues. Should I edit it? Does it turn up voters off when they see that I am answering a question I changed, possibly to better suit my answer?
73693
I've been finding "answers" that are slapped together and submitted, with the sometimes explicit intention of "I'm going to edit this".  e.g.   This seems silly, and I think ought to be discouraged.  Is the proper response "oh, how annoying", commenting, down-voting, flagging?  I'm heistant on the last two becuase sometimes they are edited (sometimes within the 5min grace) and become good answers, and then there's an unnecessary dv or flag.
103285
Following sequence of events occurred on :   First answer was posted, but was wrong. I posted my answer, which was correct :-) First answer was then modified to match my answer (with attribution)   Meanwhile, the first answer got a total of four up-votes, some from when it was still wrong. My answer has one. There is no accepted answer yet.  I guess this falls into the "grin-and-bear-it-and-move-on" category? What are the ethics of essentially posting a different answer which is still timestamped with the time of an earlier, incorrect answer? Is this flaggable?
60766
Here's the situation- someone asks a question, accepts an answer, and then un-accepts the answer, and edits the question, making that answer and other existing answers incorrect...  I've tried to research the issue on Meta and found a few cases of this happening, the general consensus seems to be that its not appreciated and the OP should have asked a new question, but there doesn't seem to be any real mechanism or suggestion as to what to do about it.   Should these cases be flagged for an edit roll back?  Related Questions-      Note- I'd rather not reference the specific case as it would likely draw a lot of negative attention to the asker, and I think keeping it broad would help in other cases.
40536
Edit: This question isn't a duplicate of . The quote in the highest voted answer on that question is "Bottom line: if you want to get up-votes, WRITE A GREAT ANSWER." that works well in that question. But in this question the situation is that the potentially great answer could just be copied and made to look as if the author of the answer was the one who did the copying. This is not the same situation.  This isn't a huge issue, but it's something I've witnessed more than once now.  Take this question for example:   When I posted  about using jQuery's on change event listener there was one other answer which only said something along the lines of, "you can use AJAX for this", nothing more - not helpful at all, especially as AJAX wouldn't be used for this anyway.  After posting my answer I commented on the other answer saying that AJAX wouldn't be used and a few minutes later  was changed to also use the on change event.  The problem here is that as this edit was done so shortly after the answer was submitted, the original content doesn't appear in that answer's .  Anyone looking at the two answers would think hey, this guy [edited answer] posted the correct solution first so this answer should be accepted.  How would this be dealt with? What's in place to stop people making a really quick invalid answer then editing it as soon as somebody else has posted up a working solution to replicate that?
99456
Suppose I come across old question with glaring syntax error or  - should I edit it thus throwing it to the top of the line, or leave it be?  Motivation to edit is in case someone come across it as result of a search, but as it's old and not relevant question anymore, it doesn't feel right to put it on top of the line again.  If we had the option to edit without bumping it would be ideal, but I guess such feature is not very realistic.  So, what's your opinion?
9859
What should I do when I see a question that is a duplicate of another one?   Should I answer it? Should I downvote it? Should I comment? Should I edit the question to indicate it's a duplicate? If I can, should I (vote to) close the question? What happens when I vote to close as duplicate? Or: Why did a comment with my name on it just appear? Should I flag it for moderator attention? What about similar or related questions?
72591
When flagging an answer there doesn't seem to be an option for duplicates. Is there an etiquette for this, or nothing in place?  If there is nothing in place can I suggest a flag as duplicate option. It seems rather annoying that people just rep hunt by duplicating previously stated answers, with changes that are limited or non existent.  I think the only use case where this might cause upset is when someone has genuinely submitted an answer, and someone else has just submitted theirs as they have been writing.   In this scenario, where the time between answers is short and a factor, then perhaps a 'merge' function could be introduced. Which then assigns joint authorship, splits the reputation for the answer and allows an editor to take the best of both duplicate answers.
102605
I just had a case of a user who re-posted his question because his first question was closed as a duplicate. And, logically, I closed his re-post as a duplicate of his original, asking him to edit his original and explain why it's not a duplicate, so we can reopen it.  This process has worked like that for years now, but suddenly I realized that with the new message, question repetition is even encouraged:     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.   Clearly, a new user who finds their questions closed will now be happy to just post their question again and again, until it's not a duplicate anymore, instead of just fixing their original post.  We need to be more explicit about this, and show this message to the OP of the question:     If those answers do not fully address your question, please edit your question and explain why it is not a duplicate.   The original message should still be visible to other users and visitors, as they can't fix that question, of course.
96928
I answered a question and my answer was: (pick one)   Deleted Converted to a comment Added to my question as an edit   Why was this?  Why was my answer not acceptable?  What is the definition of an acceptable answer on Stack Exchange?
106676
When editing an answer, the &quot;new revision&quot; message is shown for a short moment. This makes no sense because the revision you just created is automatically displayed anyway.
47649
When I post a question and want to add a new line, I have to press Return two times, or else the next text will appear on the same line.  Is this really supposed to behave this way? If so, why?
38864
Duplicate questions are "solved" &#8212; it's clear what to do with them, there're tools to deal with them... but what happens when two users post the same answer? This happens a fair bit, particularly on questions with simple answers ("Click this button"-type ones).  Do we upvote both answers, since they are both correct? Do we upvote the first one (although if the answers were posted within a few minutes of each other, after an hour it's impossible to tell as they both show up as "answered 1 hour ago")? Do we upvote the currently highest voted one? Do we upvote one and downvote the other? Do we flag one (seems a little excessive)? Something else?
943
It often occurs to me to add an edit summary to a question-edit immediately after submitting the edit, especially if the changes aren't obvious (formatting etc.). So I:   Click "edit" again. Fill in the summary Click on "Save Edits".   The 'edit' (no actual change has been made to the title/body/tags)  is accepted, but the summary doesn't show up, i.e. it is silently rejected.   I don't think it should work this way because the summary has been added by the original editor within the original edit's edit-window. In fact if I remember correctly, it to used to work as expected earlier; so perhaps this is a recent change.
47417
Question: What if the author of a question can accept a comment?   The problem:  Time and time again, answers are posted as a comment.  Usually, the person who commented has the best of intention (e.g. it was a trivial answer [to the answerer], and they weren't sure if the OP would immediately edit the question after the comment).  But this leaves the frustrating situation of an unanswered question with a perfectly good answer.  This problem accumulates over the years.     Candidate solution:  The OP can just "accept" the comment, after which a duplicate of the comment is made an accepted CW answer, with a preface indicating that it was originally a comment, e.g. This answer was originally a comment posted by [[blah]] that has been accepted by the author of the question.   Comments on this scheme:   The author of the comment has indicated they're not interested in gaining/losing reputation through their comment (thus CW answer). The original comment is still there. If desirable, the "author" of the accepted question could be a "bot", so the answer is not attributed to a genuine account.  (I suppose it would already be technically possible for Joe Blow to create a script for a bot that creates an answer from a comment in the proposed way.)     A similar question was asked before  (over 3 years ago), and in numerous other questions which have been deemed "duplicates" (,  and ; see also ), so there seems to be demand for such a feature.  The answers to these questions seem (to me, at least) quite weak:   "ask the commenter to add the comment as an answer"   The OP already did this by asking the question in the first place.  And what if the author of the comment doesn't respond (or takes a long time to respond)?  This also adds more chit-chat irrelevant to the question.   "add an answer of your own, referring to the comment, and accept it."   A hacky workaround.  How could this possibly be better than accepting a comment?  (Yet, this is the most up-voted response.)  Moreover, this adds to the user's list of "answers" (thus making the user's page harder to look through).   "When i leave a comment, i do so because i want to leave a comment."   Great; now what about everyone else?  In the immortal words of the FAQ: "Other people can edit my posts?!"  And it's not even an edit, it's copying the post from one box to another (a more hacky version of which is regarded as the "accepted" method).
120176
I recently answered a question in haste by posting a link to the answer on my blog.  Before I had a chance to come back and expand on my answer, it was deleted by a mod.  I would really like a chance to post a well-written answer.  Should I edit my deleted answer or add a new one?