How much can an answer be modified before it should be its own entity?

Question

An edit was in the review queue for this answer and it’s clear that the author of the edit is doing everyone a favour with the additional details being added:

Given how drastic the “hijack” of the answer is, should this be an additional answer that can be voted upon based on its merit, or is the edit an ideal situation as it reduces the number of answers that a reader needs to filter?

Answer 1

I do agree that that is a comprehensive edit, but it isn't actually adding anything new, only explanations and details. The main answer, "use kiosk mode" is unchanged. This couldn't have been posted as a separate answer since it wouldn't have been adding a new approach but would only have been a more detailed version of an existing answer.

So I think it was right to be submitted as an edit since it keeps the original solution (use kiosk mode) and just makes the answer much better by including more details. Had this been posted as a new answer, it would most likely have been flagged (correctly) as duplicating the information in another.

Answer 2

This should definitely be a new answer.

An editor should improve an post grammatically, visually, and based on their comprehension of the problem (and many times the comments of the OP), but should also strive to preserve the original intention of the OP.

In this case, the edit clearly deviates from the original answer, adding much more content and even changing the commands that were present in the original answer. The rejection reasons in the Suggested Edits review queue include the following:

Either one of these reasons is fine for the edit to be rejected against.

Another reason for rejecting it is that the answer was judged based on its original content and obtained 4 upvotes. Completely changing it, as in this case, would require for the answer to be judged again by the people who voted. Obviously, this is not feasible, as the voters may never see this post again.

All in all, this is a bad edit but probably a good answer and the editor should get the merit of it.

Answer 3

I remember reading somewhere in the SE help wikis (I'll try to dig it up when I get a chance. If anyone else knows where it is already, please post it.) about "support answers". I can't remember the actual term, but the concept has stuck with me.

I am referring to an answer that (in my own wording) isn't quite enough if it were to stand alone, but when provided alongside another answer, fills in important gaps where needed, and adds context which makes the original more helpful in some way.

The consensus was that these were/ are valid answers, with users being encouraged to provide them where needed.

This is how I usually react in situations like the one above. I give a secondary answer, but I make sure that the very first sentence / paragraph informs the reader about the answer's purpose. I also make sure, in the same breath, to point the reader toward the answer to which I am adding.

In this situation, this seems like the best solution to me, as answers like the original above are little more than words to many (most?) if the poster doesn't try to explain, or link an explanation to, terms like kiosk mode. To anyone who has never heard of that term, the answer would have been worthless.

However, I wouldn't feel comfortable editing info like that into another users post, because there is always the possibility that I do not understand the concepts being discussed as well as I think I do. There have been times when I was certain of an answer, only to find out later that I had completely misinterpreted the question. The result is embarrassing enough when it is my own name at the bottom of the post. This is the main reason that I do not try to alter content in another user's answer, unless it cannot be avoided. I am good enough at embarrassing myself. I don't need any help.