Why more points are required to comment on threads, while you can provide answers more easily? I think it should be the other way round. I see many question on this site to which i have some doubts but i can't post my doubts there as I don't have enough points, so I am forced to open a new thread with the same question.

And I believe to provide answers, you should be more reputed. But that's not the case here.

| |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "I believe to provide answers, you should be more reputed." Ideally I somewhat agree, except the reputation system here is a little weird, and the main way you get reputation is through people voting your answers up. I also don't like the reputation limit on comments. Perhaps it prevents spam? I don't know. $\endgroup$ – Billy Jul 27 '13 at 17:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ See this meta.SO thread (and the linked questions in the sidebar on the right). $\endgroup$ – Zev Chonoles Jul 27 '13 at 17:09
  • $\begingroup$ Actually restriction on comment creates duplicacy, which surely this site doesn't want. So i really they should be liberal with comment points. $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 17:10
  • $\begingroup$ Now i would really like to know why people downvoted this question, so that i don't repeat it in future. $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 17:12
  • $\begingroup$ @Ramit: Downvotes on meta work differently (they don't affect your reputation) and have different meanings; see this meta.math.SE thread. $\endgroup$ – Zev Chonoles Jul 27 '13 at 17:23
  • $\begingroup$ @Ramit Votes have a different meaning on meta. Here, a downvote means that the person thinks there should be a minimum reputation to comment. $\endgroup$ – user1729 Jul 27 '13 at 17:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Link says"The intent is to encourage new users to avoid commenting since the site's focus is questions and answers"Now its funny.Bcoz other day,i tried posting questions & i got all the weird notifications asking me to be polite while asking question, that is to say,not being imperative,when i had just posted the question as it is.And i was just expecting answer.But no,I was made to reframe questions so that it looked like request with proper efforts to solve the question.This site is just being another classroom.It is not at all supporting question-answer format.So,why doesn't it accept so? $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 17:27
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Ramit As for the imperative, I can take it or leave it. But the primary reason you were asked to reframe your questions is this: we don't want Math.SE to turn in to a place that students can just post word-for-word their homework problems, have somebody else hand them a solution, and turn them in. I am not saying this is what you were trying to do, mind you; but, to prevent that, we try to have people show us that they have put effort in to understanding on their own. This also makes answering the question easier, because we know what their stumbling point is. $\endgroup$ – Nick Peterson Jul 27 '13 at 17:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @NicholasR.Peterson- i very much respect your genuine concern there, but all i am saying is- this site should take one stand, whether it is building a ques-ans format or a discussion forum. If i don't get to comment i hear that it's ques-ans format. if i can't plainly ask questions, i hear that i need to discuss things, not just accept an answer. Maybe, one should not rigidly say that it a ques-ans site, because it is not. $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 18:30
  • $\begingroup$ Now i don't mean to disrespect anybody here. You all are my seniors there, maybe teachers. I am just raising my concern. $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 18:32
  • $\begingroup$ Commenting is a perk. We invest in the site and we are rewarded by being able to comment. $\endgroup$ – user1729 Jul 27 '13 at 18:37
  • $\begingroup$ In my last to last comment, I meant 'expect' instead of 'accept' an answer. $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 18:37

Lowering the requirement for commenting has been extensively discussed in the past, and declined: Lower the amount of reputation needed to comment. You can read the reasons given (pro and con) in that thread.

A more sophisticated proposals of this kind is currently under discussion: Allow anyone to comment but hide low-rep users' comments until reviewed.

Without trying to replicate all the points made above, I'll give one. Questions and answers undergo review in multiple ways: by being on the front page and by being placed in review queues when applicable. Comments can be left on posts without anyone, other than the post owner, noticing. For many posts, the owner is no longer around: e.g., one could easily add spam or worthless comments to 3329 answers by Arturo Magidin. Thus, allowing a user to comment is putting an amount of trust in the user. And trust must be earned.

| |
  • $\begingroup$ Now, that's a new insight that comments don't get noticed on time. That's a valid point. Thanks. $\endgroup$ – Ramit Jul 27 '13 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ It's interesting to note that almost all of the highly upvoted answers on that thread are in favour of lowering the amount of reputation needed, and that (albeit having only skimmed that page) I don't see anyone who's addressed the artificial disparity between answers and comments. (That is, as far as I see it, any way in which comments can be abused is also an way in which answers can be abused.) $\endgroup$ – Billy Jul 27 '13 at 19:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Billy New answers bump the question to the front page, where at least someone will click on the question title. There is also a review for answers by new users to old questions, specifically designed to weed out undesirable content. No such safeguards exist for comments. They could still be introduced, but that's the SE team decision to make. And I doubt that they'll do it, because they do not want to put more resources (including reviewers' time) into comments. $\endgroup$ – 40 votes Jul 27 '13 at 19:34
  • $\begingroup$ So, essentially, comments can be left and no one will ever see them to delete them? Forgive me for asking: to whom is this actually a problem? Comments are not the main focus of already-answered questions, but are indispensable for questions that have only just been asked. So it would be perfectly reasonable, for example, to allow new users to comment on questions with new activity in the last 24 hours or something. $\endgroup$ – Billy Jul 28 '13 at 0:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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