Answers should always explain. If they don't, they are bad answers even if correct. That said, in most cases, the magical source is simply man command which will print the manual of the command in question. Personally, I try to explain, for example, why I used a particular option for a program by writing something like
As explained in man grep:
This is HTML that works also in the used Markup language here on StackExchange. You would write <kbd>F1</kbd> to achieve F1 (when it is surrounded by ` for code formatting, HTML is ignored). kbd is the abbreviation for keyboard.
Oh, and in comments you also have no HTML support.
For more information, look there:
Firstly, a comment only saying "make it better" is worse than useless. The comment must spell out what needs to happen to make the post better.
That said, there are situations where iterative help is required. The system already suggests breaking out long comment threads into post-specific chat-rooms. They're linked to from the comments, so even after the ...
Even when keeping in mind What is the difference between apt and apt-get? there is still no logical reason to enforce using apt over apt-get/apt-cache. An extra second or two to type 4-6 extra characters is not a major inconvenience and the vast majority of users are not going to care if they're typing apt versus apt-get so long as it gets the job done of ...
We all know the difference:
What is the difference between apt and apt-get?
Both have their merit as both work for the task they are designed to.
This also means there is no reason why we should force people into one or the other.
Downvote and flag their answers away (using a custom flag explaining the situation).
Proper attribution is mandatory per how the user provided content is licensed (and I guess those answers would lack it?).
Leveraging the lack of attribution you should at least get those posts deleted; also a certain number of violations of the rules (in this case in ...
I differentiate between "Type these commands to do the task" (which should be copy/paste-able), and "Here is what my answer produces on MY system (YMMV)", where the $ and # are used to show context.
A recent example is my answer to this question
It's probably on the line.
It doesn't suggest why there's a problem or confirm that it's a problem with a specific browser. If you did this, it would be a much better answer... But it's certainly on its way there.
But I'm saying that with context. I know that on a technical level Chrome likes to block things it considers suspicious. "Try another browser" ...
It sounds like you're on a network that's blocking Imgur. That's where all the images are hosted. You can verify that by trying to visit them. That would explain why the pop-up isn't working and why you can't view images.
You could upload the images to another host but Stack Exchange has an arrangement with Imgur to host files permanently. This is so we don'...
If you think it's completely wrong, the first step should be to point out where the answerer went awry. Leave a comment. This is necessary (in my mind) because you might be wrong and might be misunderstanding the significance of the answer. If you leave a comment, the problem can be addressed, or countered and you can be notified.
Then vote accordingly. If ...
I just noticed, what you are proposing is the same as the question page we have already. Of all the sections you list for the page, only three could be mandatory for every question and they are
Title stating a brief problem description
A description of the problem, and how it is affecting the user
All the others require you to know or provide ...
You lost me at "Hypothetical Situation".
This site is more about solving practical problems that people face regularly every day, not satisfying intellectual curiosity on syncing algorithms. (Though that is an interesting question, I just don't think it's AU material.)
I think in general life, every good answer should be accompanied by at least an impression of it's foundation.
If I give an answer on Askubuntu, I try to make clear if it is based (mostly) on an external source (I add the source as a link), if I speak purely from my own experience, or a combination of both. This gives the user an idea where to find ...
You're missing something. The site uses Markdown formatting and # means h1 in markdown.
You either need to wrap with a pre tag, or use the Markdown code formatting (select the code and press the code icon, or press Control+K).
Using the Markdown is preferred but there are legitimate reasons to use HTML (eg you want to emphasise a line of code). Markdown is ...