I recently posted this answer. While I think my answer is correct, OP of the question doesn't seem to be convinced by my logic (or perhaps it is not clearly enough stated). I think it would help to have some other people look at my answer, and

  1. verify it it is sound and possibly explain the idea another, clearer way (which would hopefully convince OP), or
  2. critique it and point out where a mistake has been made.

Should I bump my own answer (it seems somewhat more weird than bumping your own question)? Is this good practice when an answer hasn't been "peer-reviewed"?


  • $\begingroup$ "it seems harder than bumping your question" I am not sure why you think this is the case. Could you please elaborate. $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 25 '16 at 13:28
  • $\begingroup$ @quid Perhaps I should have written "it seems more weird.." instead. But from a purely technical point of view (and not an ethical one), one could say harder because of the possibility of editing tags in the case of a question. $\endgroup$ – Bobson Dugnutt Aug 25 '16 at 13:30
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Did you try asking in chat whether somebody knowledgeable could have a look at your answer? (There is no guarantee that somebody will do so, but there is none even if you bump the post.) $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Aug 25 '16 at 13:34
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak I hadn't considered that at all, thanks! I haven't really used the chat before, which room would you suggest I use? I could imagine rooms for "game theory" would be sparsely populated. Also, what do you mean by "but there is none even if you bump the post"? Wouldn't bumping the answer potentially attract attention from someone knowledgeable? $\endgroup$ – Bobson Dugnutt Aug 25 '16 at 13:37
  • $\begingroup$ But if you retag the question-post the full thread is bumped, including the answer. $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 25 '16 at 13:40
  • $\begingroup$ @quid True, then I'm sticking to "more weird" :) $\endgroup$ – Bobson Dugnutt Aug 25 '16 at 13:41
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak I found the "Constructive criticism .." page, I'll use that. $\endgroup$ – Bobson Dugnutt Aug 25 '16 at 14:08
  • $\begingroup$ @Lovsovs By "none even if..." I meant that even if you bump the post there is no guarantee that somebody will check your post in detail. (Which your comment seem to confirm - you have used the word potentially.) I think that the most reasonable candidate is the main chatroom for this site. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Aug 25 '16 at 14:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Lovsovs Constructive criticism room sounds reasonable too. (Although it probably has less users than the main chatroom, the room description says that the purpose of this room is along the lines of what you need, I'd guess.) $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Aug 25 '16 at 14:10

It's been already suggested in the comments, but I think the constructive criticism and constructive praise chat room may be of interest to you. You can also post in the main chatroom.

Additionally, I would not be opposed to you asking a new question, linking to your answer, and asking if it is correct. Ideally, narrow it down to a key part of your answer that is in dispute, and quote that in the new question.

Finally, while a bounty is an option, be warned that while a bounty will usually increase views, often people are reluctant to spend a lot of time reading a long answer, and the bounty will not change that. After all, the bounty doesn't reward people for their feedback. So you may just waste your reputation.


A way to proceed is to try to clarify or to expand your answer a bit via an edit. This will bump the question-thread. Usually, this is preferable to a dummy-edit done for the sake of bumping.

Beyond this, the feature to give a question-thread added visibility is via a bounty. One of the reasons for placing a bounty is to "draw attention." Thus, you could place a bounty on the question and explain why you did this, to get feedback on your answer.

This may seem strange at first, but really there should be nothing wrong with this in such a scenario. Note that in this case you need to place at least a bounty of 100 points (as you have answered the question) and you will not receive the bounty points yourself. Thus, this will cost you 100 points, but you might be compensated by some points you get in upvotes. (You could even break even or make a gain. To minimize the risk of gaming the system in this way, is the reason the lower limit for a bounty is 100 and not just 50 in case you have an answer on the question.)

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the useful suggestions. An clarifying edit would be appropriate, of course, but in this particular case, I'm actually more in need of finding out whether or not my answer is correct, thus the need of "peer-review". $\endgroup$ – Bobson Dugnutt Aug 25 '16 at 13:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, I understand that. But most any post is improvable in one way or another. And with a genuine edit you side-step the issue if pure bumping is admissible. (Of course if you overdo the genuine editing you might still draw some negative reactions.) $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 25 '16 at 13:43

You must log in to answer this question.

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