...AND is it a breach of etiquette? I do not think anyone has done so but I, for one, often thought of answering my own question in negative given the option is permitted. Will this be frowned upon?

| |
  • 1
    I'm confused what you mean by "opposing viewpoint" with regard to questions. Questions (in and of themselves) have no viewpoint, that's why they're questions. Sure, there can be a viewpoint in the background context of the question, but the question itself is not an assertion, and so is viewpoint-less (i.e. it takes no position). Whats the opposing viewpoint of no viewpoint? – stoicfury Dec 12 '11 at 3:39
  • Perhaps it was a bit poorly worded on my part. I was trying to imply: someone posts a question: "Is this proof of God's existence valid?" or anything that has polarized answer, and then for some reason realizes the mistake (or an alternative viewpoint to) his claim, and answers contrary to his original stance. – user1207 Dec 12 '11 at 3:55
  • So you would ask a question, say "Is this proof of God's existence valid?" and then answer it, saying "yes it is valid, here's way." And then you would answer it again with the opposing viewpoint, saying "but no, it is not valid, this is why." If this is what you are suggesting, then yes, in principle it's fine. It's a little weird (and pointless), but fine... (weird because it seems like an elaborate way to prove a point and pointless because answers can only have 1 definite (and accepted) answer, and for the question to be valid on this site it needs to be this way anyways). – stoicfury Dec 12 '11 at 15:54

It is not against general SE policy to answer your own questions. In fact, it is explicitly encouraged. The main idea is not, however, that this provides a good opportunity to boost your reputation (I suspect users would catch on and would not continue to upvote you if that was the sole purpose), and nor is it the idea to pose 'puzzles' (this is never explicitly stated, but I do not think that is okay; this has been brought up on MathSE and occasional puzzles are tolerated, but unpopular).

The purpose of this site is for people to be able to get answers to problems that they face in one form or another. So if you ask a real, answerable question, and later give a good answer, then that can only be good!

| |
  • +1 Correct, except that if you want to boost your rep by posting and answering your own questions, that's still fine, just as long as the questions and answers are good quality. I honestly can't imagine why people would care. People getting mad because you're posting too many good quality questions? lol... – stoicfury Dec 12 '11 at 3:45
  • Very true. Very true. – davidlowryduda Dec 12 '11 at 3:47

That setup you describe seems to be a legitimate and recognized rhetorical pattern of setting up a premise to be knocked down (either a straw man or reductio ad absurdam, or simply a reversal).

It might seem a little disingenuous or deliberate or mercurial, and on the surface just strange, but it is not in and of itself a breach of etiquette. No one will be inconvenienced or hurt by such usage, only possibly confused.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.