11

What I mean is, say we come across a post that's fairly old and already has an answer that's been accepted. If we have something to say other than what's been already said in the accepted answer or if we have different input entirely, should we answer the question or just let it lie since it has an accepted answer already?

Obviously the poster thought the accepted answer was correct, but should this stop us from providing late-entry input as well? I don't want to beat any dead horses when it comes to answered questions, but I'm also curious what the guidelines for this type of situation are.

||||||
12

Yes, if you have new or better information then it should be added.

There is nothing to stop the original poster removing acceptance from the existing answer and giving it to yours.

Also, other future readers seeking similar information may benefit from your added input.

If your addition is minor in nature then consider adding a comment to the existing answer but a new answer would be appreciated.

||||||
8

Absolutely. If you have a different point of view that will help future people with similar issues, chime in. Sometimes there are good ways to augment an accepted answer. For example, an obvious one would be another symptom or consequence that the accepted answer didn't illustrate.

||||||
3

I don't think repeating information that is already there is necessarily useful. Unless the answer is different in some way my instinct it to encourage voting up an existing answer. Repeats dilute the value of the answers. That said there are almost certainly times when you'll have additional information to add that approaches the problem differently or that raises a caution or alternative explanation and so contributes to the overall body of knowledge.

I'd hate to see lots of "duplicate" answers, the clarity of the answers (and the voting to support them) is one of the reasons that I value StackExchange.

||||||
2

Involvement, I view the Stack Exchange as a location for involvement in ideas and discussions that each person who reads a groups posting can choose to participate in or not. To block one from adding new ideas or repeating old ones would be a detriment to that entire concept. If every time I echoed another person or posted a new thought months later some one shut the door on me, I would cease to provide input and look else where for more friendly pastures.

||||||

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .