If I have a question that depends on a previous question that's already resolved, how do I post that follow up Question?
- Edit my original question
- Post a new one
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
-
5$\begingroup$ If it's already resolved, radical changes to the original question would waste all of the effort of the people who wrote back to you. So don't do that. In other words, "Do not move the goalposts when it is cheap and easy to make new goalposts." Then again, do not run wild with too may goalposts: make sure your questions are carefully written :) $\endgroup$– rschwiebAug 12, 2014 at 14:06
-
3$\begingroup$ Small suggestion: a single question mark suffices as an indication that a sentence is a question. $\endgroup$– user147263Aug 12, 2014 at 14:34
-
$\begingroup$ @900sit-upsaday Ya I will try not to do that again. $\endgroup$– SudhanshuAug 12, 2014 at 14:39
-
1$\begingroup$ Very similar question just came up at MO: meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/1845/… $\endgroup$– Gerry MyersonAug 12, 2014 at 23:42
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
Post a new question, linking back to the original with a brief explanation of how they are connected.
Editing the old question is bad form, as it would require the existing answers to be re-written (which is a pain for those kind people who took the time to answer the question!).
There are, of course, exceptions. The main one, as has been pointed out in the comments, is when "there is a trivial case you forgot to rule out (such as the function is identically zero) and the answer is merely that trivial case. Then, feel free to orphan the trite answer by improving your question."
The key points here, thought, are that the case should be trivial and the answer should be trite. For example, The OP of this question omitted a non-trivial case, and the answer was simple but pleasing (it was not trite$^{\dagger}$). So the OP started a new question rather than editing the original.
$^{\dagger}$ Trite (adj.): (of a remark or idea) lacking originality or freshness; dull on account of overuse.
-
5$\begingroup$ I agree. The exception is when there is a trivial case you forgot to rule out (such as "the function is identically zero") and the answer is merely that trivial case. Then, feel free to orphan the trite answer by improving your question. $\endgroup$– GEdgarAug 12, 2014 at 16:29
-
$\begingroup$ Is it possible to lock/close a question where the question is now outdated / obsolete as a result of the follow-up? $\endgroup$ Dec 5, 2019 at 22:08
-
$\begingroup$ @dustytrash well, there is a benefit to keeping such questions. You can flag the question if you want. Is there a specific question you are thinking about? $\endgroup$– user1729Dec 6, 2019 at 8:41
-
$\begingroup$ Also, it's nice to keep old questions which have an answer. Answers can take a long time to figure out, and then a long time to compose. Deleting them because they have been superceded by something else feels dismissive of this effort. $\endgroup$– user1729Dec 6, 2019 at 8:44