While doing some troubleshooting I came around this post which states:

If you configured your vmware VM to run in a virtualized NAT network, then you will not be able to access/ping your VM from the Host,

This is the statement that I consider as false due to the fact that I can actually do so, meaning ping from my host (win7 laptop) to the guest (vm running kali) in Vmware workstation 14 pro.

However that is just a statement before providing two workarounds, so although it does not invalidate entirely the answer, it can be somewhat misleading for future readers.

The catch that bothers me is that from my pov this might be a false sentence, however depending on customers specs and environment this might be completely true.

How does one proceed in this type of scenario?

  • 7
    Add a comment disagreeing with that part of the post?
    – DavidPostill Mod
    Jan 16, 2018 at 23:32
  • @DavidPostill I was inclined at first to do so, but wanted to study my options before doing it, as it appears nothing gets really 'deleted' in SE and if I messed up there would be no way back.
    – DRP
    Jan 16, 2018 at 23:53
  • Comments are ephemeral and can always be deleted.
    – DavidPostill Mod
    Jan 16, 2018 at 23:54
  • write a comment disagreeing with the post. Also, pretty sure that statement is common wisdom/true for many sorts of VM nat setups
    – Journeyman Geek Mod
    Jan 17, 2018 at 1:35
  • "as it appears nothing gets really 'deleted' in SE and if I messed up there would be no way back" - Only a handful of users can see deleted comments. Your asking how to proceed, you comment, or simply downvote the answer (or both)
    – Ramhound
    Jan 17, 2018 at 1:52
  • @Ramhound "How does one proceed in this type of scenario?" yet the question is tagged with 'discussion'. As per meta.superuser.com/questions/12782/superuser-annoying-forum this is not a forum, so maybe I should edit question to be more granular. My expectation on the steps to proceed was to get some feedback in case there was some 'special procedure' or to backup my initial thought which was to comment upon it, however this could lead to a "I say vs you say" type of comment section. In the end i down voted the answer the person had posted and created this question for my own perusal.
    – DRP
    Jan 17, 2018 at 2:29
  • 2
    The Super User site in general, and the main site specifically, is not a discussion forum. However, here on Meta that's less the case, as Meta's purpose is to discuss matters directly relevant to the site's operation. Jan 17, 2018 at 14:17
  • 1
    Obligatory XKCD: xkcd.com/386 Jan 24, 2018 at 23:02

1 Answer 1


Since you're already aware of the accurate and inaccurate parts of the post, I trust you want to take action to help improve the answer and assist others who might rely on it to solve a similar situation. Therefore your options are:

  • Leave a comment explaining what you believe is wrong. If you're able, include a suggestion on how to improve the post. This helps the answerer improve their post and alerts others to the possibility it contains wrong information. The answerer or other users can consider your comment and provide feedback. If you find there was a valid reason for the statement and your comment is no longer needed you can delete it. Conversely, if your comment leads to an improvement to the answer rendering it obsolete you can delete it. Only moderators can see deleted comments.

  • Vote. If you feel the wrong information outweighs the good, consider a down vote. You may also find the answer useful despite the questionable statement and wish to up vote. It's really up to you. Voting is important though because it shares your expertise with future visitors who may not be as easily able to identify the correct/best solution to the question.

Actions to avoid

Because the answer is a legitimate attempt to answer the question you should not flag it. Editing it is also not an option as it's clear the poster intended to make the statement in question.

  • I'd say editing is an option if the user doesn't react to comments within a reasonable time frame. Jan 28, 2018 at 22:45
  • Edits that clearly conflict with the original poster's intent, even those that correct wrong information, are not acceptable. Jan 28, 2018 at 22:50
  • I don't think that's true. I've seen plenty of times when a useful edit is accepted and even enforced if the original poster actively resists it by rolling it back (example). It may be not a good idea to do such edits before one reaches 2k though. Jan 29, 2018 at 0:09
  • The example you linked discusses improving a post, which is encouraged. But you must never change a post's meaning, even if you're trying to fix a wrong post. Jan 29, 2018 at 0:24

You must log in to answer this question.

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