Timeline for Revealing bug report considered answer?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:25 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://askubuntu.com/ with https://askubuntu.com/
|
|
| Apr 27, 2016 at 14:40 | comment | added | Oli Mod | The difference is the signpost serves both us (SEO, future dupe close target) and the OP (explains what the problem is, lets them see the problem, subscribe, help directly) and the developers (stops a dupe report, gets more feedback, subscribers, etc). I'm not saying they wouldn't be much better if they included detail, just that given the choice between leaving (or improving) the LOA vs deleting the LOA and closing as a bug report, what has the most positive outcomes is clear. SE tradition be damned. | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 14:34 | history | edited | terdon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
typo
|
| Apr 27, 2016 at 14:33 | comment | added | terdon | Dunno. Seems like a classic "signpost" LOA, as in "the answer is thataway". It doesn't actually provide an answer so it shouldn't be posted as an answer. If the best answer that can be given is "this is this bug, go read the bug report", then the question should be closed and the bug report could be added as a comment. I don't see why we should ignore the "traditional dictates" as you call them. | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 14:27 | comment | added | Oli Mod | "This is this bug" LOAs to bug reports can (depending on the question) still be valid answers and they still serve a functional purpose for both us and the bug tracker. It's not in the same category as a "Go and read this tutorial" LOA. | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 14:22 | comment | added | terdon | The OP's answer is great. The one Zzzach mentions however, is a classic link-only non-answer. Your answer here seems to suggest that such things are acceptable when linking to a bug report. Have I misunderstood? | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 6:35 | history | answered | OliMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |