Wanna-be-philosophers really hate when you point their flawed arguments and schemas.

This was the somewhat salty comment to my answer (I know) on meta about how we need more references in answers.

Aside from its rudeness, I wondered

  1. why aren't people pointing these things out, really at all?
  2. is that what the majority of answers are doing (flawed arguments and schemas)
  1. People are. Frequently people leave comments or answers about this kind of thing.
  2. No. We have a voting system through which good answers move to the top.

P.S. I removed the comment thread as it started with a rude comment and the rest depended on it.

  • ah ok, sorry. but not offensive, i'm sure – user28117 Aug 17 '17 at 6:01
  • ps not sure what the point of your answer is tbh? just to reaffirm yourself? – user28117 Aug 17 '17 at 6:02
  • The point is to provide answers to your question. Your question is based on one loose comment without much context, and you basically ask is this true without providing examples from the main site or context to show that there actually is a problem. As such, I cannot do more than tell you how I see it. If you believe this is incorrect and there actually is a problem, then let's see some examples. – user2953 Aug 17 '17 at 6:08
  • do you mean examples of upvoted questions that don't have references? – user28117 Aug 17 '17 at 6:10
  • even if you ignore context, i don't recall ever seeing an answer with comments that point out errors in reasoning. i mean, i tried earlier today, and no-one seemed to care – user28117 Aug 17 '17 at 6:15
  • See for instance philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/17897/…, lots of answers there have comments asking for clarification or arguing with the post. But you need to give this some time, communication does not go instantly. – user2953 Aug 17 '17 at 6:29
  • fair point tbh, people have tried to encourage it. nb, that answer is dated Nov 3 '14 at 16:29, and was not edited – user28117 Aug 17 '17 at 6:30
  • Well, it's the author's decision if it needs revision or not. If he decides not to, the comment is still there for later readers to note that the answer might have some issues. – user2953 Aug 17 '17 at 6:32
  • except that it's fits perfectly with 95+% of the site (hence my comment) – user28117 Aug 17 '17 at 6:33
  • @Keelan I'm sure it's not intentional, but this answer comes across as a little disingenuous. I'm reading the question as asking why there is not more intervention from the community regarding poorly referenced/argued answers (maybe this is where I'm mistaken?). You've answered that such action is, in fact, frequent (using only one example from 2014) and that the voting system functions to highlight answers which are well referenced/argued, in which case what is the purpose of the frequent moderator intervention on poor quality answers? – Isaacson Aug 18 '17 at 6:44
  • I've already pointed out here nine examples of high reputation users giving highly voted answers which are entirely personal opinion with no references at all, the implications of which have been summarily ignored. It seems self evident that answers are frequently given which are poorly argued or unreferenced and that their acceptance or critique by the community is sufficiently random to be worthy of comment. – Isaacson Aug 18 '17 at 6:48
  • @Isaacson this meta question was based on one loose comment without context or examples. Mediocre questions attract mediocre answers. – user2953 Aug 18 '17 at 9:47
  • @Keelan I'm not quite following you, whilst I completely agree that mediocre questions get mediocre answers, I thought this question was about poorly argued or unreferenced answers, and that often they are considered (by vote) to be far from mediocre. I think that inconsistency in this regard is an important issue especially in respect of new user retention. That's why I thought that dismissing the concern with merely a general impression that such answers are frequently flagged, when the evidence seems to the contrary, was something of a missed opportunity. – Isaacson Aug 18 '17 at 10:00
  • @Isaacson the mediocre question is this meta question, as it is unclear and not based on any real data or examples. I think that what I wrote is correct, but agree that it is not backed by evidence. Basically, I cannot spend my time searching for examples to answer meta questions and then poor questions may get a poor answer. I found the example I gave by looking at the homepage, so while it is an old question it is also a recently updated one. As I mentioned before, criticism takes time so it is understandable that there will not be as much criticism on younger posts. – user2953 Aug 18 '17 at 15:13
  • @Keelan The "mediocre" comment makes sense now, thanks. Of course it's not up to you alone to search out examples, to indicate the direction the site is going, that's why I've linked to a previous answer in which I found nine such examples myself. Unfortunately in that post I was told that all the examples I'd chosen were either too low scoring or too old to be concerned about, now it seems the argument is that they're too young. – Isaacson Aug 18 '17 at 15:55

You must log in to answer this question.