Sometimes a question is asked, and an answer is given which directly addresses the question. Then the question is edited in a way that changes what is being asked (as opposed to spelling/grammar, adding a link etc.). What ends up happening is that it reflects poorly on the one who answered, because to anyone who isn't aware of the question's history, it looks like the answer does not address the question.

I've noticed this before, and it happened to me today here. Basically I gave the basis for a particular stance of Orthodoxy, because the questioner asked for the basis. Then the questioner realized that the basis was not what he was looking for, so he changed the question (with the aid of others) to ask for the philosophical justification instead. I feel like this makes me look a bit like a troll now, to anyone who doesn't bother to logically derive from the comments that the questioner had once asked for the basis.

My suggestion is simple: Once a question is answered, no edits that change the meaning of the question should be allowed. If it is determined that the question as it is is off-topic or a duplicate, it should be closed, not changed. The questioner, of course, always has the option to ask another question, so no one loses.

Anyone agree?

  • 2
  • 2
    I changed this from a feature-request to a discussion because it looks like you're looking for more of a convention or rule than a change to the site's functionality. – Isaac Moses Aug 9 '12 at 19:42
  • @IsaacMoses Thanks. I also see in the link you provided that you've made a similar case before. I am suggesting here that it be implemented as a matter of policy. – Dov F Aug 9 '12 at 19:46
  • 1
    Also related: meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/q/703/883 – HodofHod Aug 9 '12 at 19:50
  • Am I correct that this question boils down to "Can we please implement @IsaacMoses's answer?"? If so, then I think we can simply look at the votes on that answer (+6, −0) and declare it implemented. – msh210 Aug 9 '12 at 22:38
  • @msh210 Correct. – Dov F Aug 9 '12 at 22:39
  • 1
    I'm not sure the policy mentioned in that post applies to your case. In that post it was a matter of unclarity which you interpreted one way, not changing the question because it wasn't what was intended to be asked. – Double AA Aug 9 '12 at 23:06
  • @DoubleAA In the original question he specifically asked for a source. Therefore my answer directly answered his question, even if I possibly ignored another facet of it. The way it is now makes that my answer doesn't speak to the question. – Dov F Aug 9 '12 at 23:33
  • 1
    @DovF I don't see any request for a source in the original post. He just says 'Why'. This can be interpreted in one of two ways. He meant one way, you understood a different way. So he edited to clarify. I don't think this case matches the linked post's. – Double AA Aug 9 '12 at 23:37
  • AdamRedwine presented the two ways of understanding well in this comment of his judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/18398/… – Double AA Aug 9 '12 at 23:46
  • @DoubleAA I stand corrected. But still, the way it was originally shows me as at least trying to address the question, while the modified way makes it look like I'm dodging it. – Dov F Aug 10 '12 at 0:14
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Yes.

You must log in to answer this question.

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