Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Should it be possible to "react" to one's own posts?

Parent

Should it be possible to "react" to one's own posts?

+5
−0

We now have reactions.

However, I notice that there seems to be nothing stopping a user from "reacting" to their own posts.

For some reactions, this might make sense. For example, an outdated answer might be kept around for reference or for the benefit of some subset of readers, but the user posting it could use a reaction to mark it as "outdated". They might even want to mark their own answer as "dangerous" if there's something in particular about it that someone attempting what it describes needs to be fully aware of up front.

But "worked for me"?

It's not like one would likely propose an answer without at least being fairly certain that it works for solving whatever the question is asking about; and if one does, then hopefully a wrong answer would be downvoted for not being helpful.

Should it be possible to react to one's own posts? Should certain reactions be possible to apply to one's own posts and others only to posts by other users?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+4
−0

Good question. A reaction doesn't bestow benefits (reputation, progress toward abilities, or preferential placement on the page), so in one sense reacting to your own post is harmless. On the other hand, it does add an attention-grabbing marker, and it might make sense to restrict that.

I've been thinking of the "works for me" reaction as a solution to the "accepted answer" problem -- we've heard a desire for the asker to be able to mark an answer (or mark the question as resolved), and other Q&A platforms have the "green checkmark" concept. But we also felt that this shouldn't depend on the asker, who sometimes never comes back to follow up, and we felt that a "works for me" marker that anybody could use would meet the need and then some.

So, all that said, should you be able to mark your own answer as "works for me"? It seems handy in the case of self-answers, particularly where somebody asked a question and later figured it out and came back to post an answer. Other people who are scanning the page for vetted solutions will be looking for the marker and would miss a working self-answer if we blocked that.

We could probably add "prevent self-reactions" to the configuration of individual reactions, so a community could allow self-declaration for outdatedness but not workingness. I didn't give this much thought during design and testing, I admit. Or is it sufficient to show who that reaction comes from? We already show who's reacting; would some additional indicator for the author of the post be helpful?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

3 comment threads

The same reason why one should not vote on own contributions (3 comments)
TBF I don't really see a reason why you would ever want to self-react on a post. If you found a post ... (4 comments)
Signifying ownership (1 comment)
The same reason why one should not vote on own contributions
Trilarion‭ wrote almost 3 years ago

It's not only because it may bestow benefits, but also because one is not impartial with regard to self-created content. An independent "works for me" from a different person who does not have "any stakes in the content" is more reliable. That's why it's better not to be able to react to own content (at least for most reactions, I guess).

Monica Cellio‭ wrote almost 3 years ago

Reactions are signed, not anonymous (unlike votes). Does that make a difference? (I'm not arguing either way, just probing.)

Trilarion‭ wrote almost 3 years ago

It might make a difference in that readers might put more or less trust in a reaction if they know it's the same user or the other way around, a user might react more objectively if the reaction can be traced back. But I don't think this is likely to happen. I would assume that the post creator would always be inclined to react with works for me for owned content. I would trust a third person's reaction more.