Skip to main content
Worldbuilding

Return to Answer

edited body
Source Link
The Square-Cube Law
The Square-Cube Law
  • 142.5k
  • 2
  • 18
  • 29

When your "clarifications" invalidate answers, then it is unacceptable change in question.

Your edit in such circumstances shouldn't be an edit. It should be a follow-up question. In case it was already made, it should be rolled back.

Things you decide not to write in your question are the freedom you give to people answering it. Removing some of it is a change of gamrgame, just as if you'd contradict yourself.

When your "clarifications" invalidate answers, then it is unacceptable change in question.

Your edit in such circumstances shouldn't be an edit. It should be a follow-up question. In case it was already made, it should be rolled back.

Things you decide not to write in your question are the freedom you give to people answering it. Removing some of it is a change of gamr, just as if you'd contradict yourself.

When your "clarifications" invalidate answers, then it is unacceptable change in question.

Your edit in such circumstances shouldn't be an edit. It should be a follow-up question. In case it was already made, it should be rolled back.

Things you decide not to write in your question are the freedom you give to people answering it. Removing some of it is a change of game, just as if you'd contradict yourself.

Source Link
Mołot
Mołot
  • 33.4k
  • 13
  • 23

When your "clarifications" invalidate answers, then it is unacceptable change in question.

Your edit in such circumstances shouldn't be an edit. It should be a follow-up question. In case it was already made, it should be rolled back.

Things you decide not to write in your question are the freedom you give to people answering it. Removing some of it is a change of gamr, just as if you'd contradict yourself.