|
|
|
|
|
|
by Pimpus
2984 days ago
|
|
|
> It's worth emphasizing that for the first example, the answer was provided free of charge within an hour. It shows -- the quality of the answer is quite poor. > I don't think I agree with any assessment in which this is not an unqualified success. This made me laugh. I guess the only assessment you considered is your own, which simplistically assumed time to answer is the most important factor. And yet, not a single soul finding this question on Google cares if the answer took an hour or two days. Apart from you, I guess. |
|
|
Are we talking about the same question? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17731457/hide-show-conte... I'll admit that it's not always easy to judge if an answer is useful to someone else, but it looks to me like it answers the question, the user "accepted" it, and it has 23 points. What makes you say it's "poor"?
> I guess the only assessment you considered is your own
The only strike against it you cite is some push-back in a comment... What else do you have against it?
> which simplistically assumed time to answer is the most important factor.
On top of the user accepting it, it having 23 points, it answering the question, etc.
I mean, I think I would be pleased with the outcome if I were the OP. I think I would be pleased to find that answer if I came from a Google search. If you honestly think that this is an example of "people continuously questioning the poster's motive" and exemplifies what you don't like about SO, then yeah, I don't agree with your assessment. It's not an attack on you, chill out.