6

I asked this question some time back - I was hunting for where metro apps were stored, and that was a useful starting point. I was entirely aware, and indicated in the question and the comments two possible places where non metro start menu shortcuts were placed.

Someone's placed a bounty for answering where desktop shortcuts are placed. Its a bit tricky - since it obviously has nothing to do about the original question, and could/should have been asked as a separate question in my opinion.

What's do we do in such cases?

7
  • I do think the bounty is relevant now, since the bounty text contains the question.. once the bounty is over, the bounty'd answer makes no sense.. I think we're better off refunding the bounty and then have it asked as a separate question
    – Sathyajith Bhat Mod
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:37
  • 1
    @Sathya: On the other hand, the bounty giver can just generalize the text of the post, so that the two answers will complement each other. I'm not for breaking one subject - the placement of shortcuts to the Windows Modern UI - into two questions, thus separating the subjects of metro and non-metro apps. The title of the question actually applies to both.
    – harrymc
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:44
  • 2
    The original question already contains what he asked - I'd mentioned one location of those apps on the question itself, "With my classic desktop applications they are in C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs" and I mentioned that they were in appdata as well in a comment. Those are pretty much the same as they always have been. My issue is really, that the 'bounty' was for something thats already there, and out of the scope of the original question as was asked.
    – Journeyman Geek Mod
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:46
  • @JourneymanGeek: It's a fact of life on this forum that any question or answer may be edited by anyone having enough reputation. From my point of view this is somewhat what happened to you here, so it's not against forum rules.
    – harrymc
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:49
  • 1
    Okay, so, how about editing the question to cover the whole range of shortcuts and then editing the accepted answer to include the information the is now being requested? Because, we surely don't want to have two answers that only cover part of the updated question, right?
    – Oliver Salzburg Mod
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:52
  • 3
    @harrymc: If a low rep user had done that, it would have been rejected as an invalid edit, and we'd have to substancially edit the question. I'd also be inclined to edit the existing selected answer so as not to have two partial answers, and out of a sense of fairness to the person who originally answered the question - its not fair that we move the goalposts on him.
    – Journeyman Geek Mod
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:55
  • @JourneymanGeek: What you suggest conforms also to forum rules. It's your post originally, but now also that of Gam Erix, so I think that you should also ask for his agreement.
    – harrymc
    Commented Apr 5, 2013 at 13:58

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

I think there's two ways we could handle this - I could edit the question to reflect this, and harrymc could post an answer covering both metro and non metro options. However, I think that this would be unfair to the original answer, and I'll be awarding a bounty of 100 rep to make up for this to the poster who got the answer for the original post - to make up for the overall loss of rep, and since thats the minimum I can offer in this situation

The second option is I could edit the question, and we could edit the existing accepted answer to cover the full range of answers. I'll do the edit anyway, and let the other people who're involved in this decide.

I'd recommend including the two locations - in programdata and appdata as part of either option

Changing the scope of the question is not unheard of so I'm fine with this. Either option is fine to me, and I think this is a acceptable compromise.

In general though, it might have helped to read the original question, since the additional information requested was already on there (and was the reason I was wondering how to handle this)

You must log in to answer this question.

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