Timeline for Why was my answer deleted
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10 at 16:46 | comment | added | TOOGAM | @Ramhound (I'm wary of an extended discussion in comments, but since it looks like I was asked a quesiton, I will answer it.) All answers should be subjected to evaluation. It is not always expected that a single answer will actually lead to resolution for 100% of the people who encounter the situation. I can think of some high-pressure situations where some solution that was not thought of, or was deemed unlikely, was tried anyway, and I was quite happy to have the situations resolved. That's why I see value in such answers, even if they don't qualify to win an "answer of the year" award. | |
| Sep 10 at 1:00 | comment | added | Ramhound | @TOOGAM - It might have, but if it did, it was just dumb luck that the firmware settings as a result of the load were set in such a way where Intel RST was disabled instead of enabled. There is no evidence Luator was missing the same driver, which is the reason, just updating the firmware isn’t helpful. Furthermore, what about those situations, where the current firmware was already installed | |
| Sep 10 at 0:12 | comment | added | TOOGAM | @Ramhound : From my reading, the problem would have been caused by a firmware issue for some situations, on some computers. Hence, it could be helpful for some people, even if it provides absolutely no usefulness for other people. And for those people it does potentially help, the answer hs useful value. Luator: I agree with Ramhound's assessment. I don't think the answer should have been deleted. But, the answer's lack of details makes it at least resemble many very inferior answers that are commonly posted. Your answer matches patterns that typically look bad, hence the answer feels bad | |
| Sep 4 at 14:10 | comment | added | music2myear | A line as simple as "In research I found this/these question(s) and tried the solutions in them, and they did not work..." can give the necessary differentiation. | |
| Sep 4 at 8:22 | comment | added | luator | @music2myear My worry would be that the new question is deemed too similar to the existing one and hence closed as duplicate. Also, in my opinion, it's better to have one canonical question for a common error with multiple potential answers, rather than having a different question for each case. But I guess the given question is a bit too specific for that (even though it already has several different answers, which likely wouldn't have helped the asker as well). | |
| Sep 3 at 14:41 | answer | added | music2myear | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 3 at 14:14 | comment | added | music2myear | Self-answering a question you cannot find on the site and so ask yourself is entirely OK and encouraged. One goal here is to be an encyclopedia of good questions paired with good answers. | |
| Sep 2 at 18:45 | comment | added | luator | I understand that. So the right path would be to search for a question with the same error, that doesn't already narrow down the cause (that's what I meant with a "more generic version"). Or ask a new one and self-answer if I can't find one (but that's maybe overkill). | |
| Sep 2 at 13:08 | comment | added | Ramhound | "I still think it would be good to have that answer." - I disagree with the answer being deleted, but I wouldn't;t say the answer is good because, as I said, the problem that was described would not have been caused by a firmware issue. | |
| Sep 2 at 7:35 | comment | added | luator | @Ramhound I see, so the question was too specific for my "this resolves the error in some cases, but not necessarily in the one of OP"-answer. I still think it would be good to have that answer, as it could still be helpful for others with the same error (independent of the cause) who find that question via google. But I guess I should have looked for a more generic version of it (I didn't check but I guess this kind of question likely has some duplicates). The same critique could be applied to most of the other answers as well, though. | |
| Sep 1 at 3:07 | history | became hot meta post | |||
| Aug 29 at 20:35 | comment | added | Ramhound | You can’t say with a high degree of confidence that updating the firmware would have solved the authors problem because the author of the question gave little to no information. In fact I know it wouldn’t have solved the problem because the author of the question submitted an answer to their own question. The entire problem was Intel RST drivers. You failed to identify this and subsequently submitted an answer that wasn’t related to the author’s problem. It probably shouldn’t have been deleted by the community just downvote for being unhelpful | |
| Aug 28 at 12:37 | history | asked | luator | CC BY-SA 4.0 |