5
$\begingroup$

I arrived at this Q right after it was posted. How strong would graphene armour be? What is the best design and how would it impact warfare? Both Starfish Prime and I saw the problem of it asking 2 unrelated questions. But it’s a good question.

I can flag to close, but it seemed like this one was easy to take out the second question and just pass it to the questioner to repost. There isn’t a tricky edit in this case to extract the off-topic section.

I think this would be a better service to the community. Do other moderators agree?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I would make the edit and leave a comment explaining what you did and inviting them to rollback your edit. $\endgroup$ Oct 20 '19 at 14:56
5
$\begingroup$

Putting a question on hold is not a punishment.

It is a safety measure to allow the OP editing it without being limited in their actions by answers posted before or during the edit.

Not all users, sadly, stitck to the "answer only well asked questions" principle. As soon as one of these writes an answer, editing the question becomes more difficult.

Personally I would have voted to put the question on hold and addressed the OP with a comment explaining how to improve the question, so that the OP can decide which of the two questions could be removed.

But also editing the question and explaining the rollback possibility is a viable option.

Questions belong to the community, the community decides how to handle them.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ "As soon as one of these writes an answer, editing the question becomes more difficult." Exactly... which is why it mattered that I had arrived at the question immediately, before anyone had answered. It seemed like the kindest option most likely to get good answers for the person asking the question. $\endgroup$
    – SRM
    Oct 20 '19 at 15:49
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ "Putting a question on hold is not a punishment." If getting a question reopened after an edit happened reliably this would be true. $\endgroup$ Oct 22 '19 at 3:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @candied_orange, the edit per se doesn't grant a reopening. An edit that fixes the issues does. $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch Mod
    Oct 22 '19 at 3:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @L.Dutch pardon me, I'll rephrase: If getting a question reopened after a fully correcting edit happened reliably this would be true. $\endgroup$ Oct 22 '19 at 3:09
2
$\begingroup$

After seeing Bellerophon's comment and L.Dutch, I decided to go ahead and make the edit (since there sill weren't any answers posted).

Bellerophon made a good point about telling the user they could revert the edit... since this is a brand new visitor to the forum, I decided against overwhelming them with options today and just told them about re-posting. This was not a gray area question where I expected the revert to be desirable.

Now, everyone, go prove me right (that having only one question produces answers): go answer the person's question! :-)

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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