10
\$\begingroup\$

The community has decided that answers in newer languages can now compete in (they were previously required to be marked as non-competing). However, now and then I will still come across an answer that hasn't been updated with this rule yet, so it is still marked as non-competing.

I have been both the sender and recipient of comments asking to remove the non-competing note from a submission, and I am wondering whether these comments are necessary.

Should we try to get permission from the poster before editing? Should we just edit it out without notifying them? Or should we just leave them?

\$\endgroup\$

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
14
\$\begingroup\$

Editing the text out yourself is fine, but don't get too carried away, lest you bump a lot of old challenges to the front page. The general rule of thumb for doing mass edits is to only edit content on around 5 questions per day to prevent drowning out new content with the bumps. I'd also suggest leaving a comment to avoid confusion.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ If there are multiple answers that need editing on a single question, it's best to do them all at once so it only needs to be bumped once. \$\endgroup\$
    – Laurel
    Mar 9, 2018 at 17:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Laurel Yes, I meant that users should only edit answers on around 5 questions at a time. I'll clarify. \$\endgroup\$
    – user45941
    Mar 9, 2018 at 23:54
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I also agree with this answer, but I suggest that it's recommended to add an edit summary describing why you have edited the text out, to avoid roll backs due to ignorance of the new consensus. \$\endgroup\$
    – Erik the Outgolfer
    Mar 11, 2018 at 17:47
4
\$\begingroup\$

Edit, and preferably leave a comment

We don't need to ask permission from the author to revoke NC status—it's not within their control anyway (we don't allow users to simply decide that their submission should be NC). If it is left there, it constitutes an oversight that should simply be corrected.

That said, it's not particularly important, so try not to let that be your only edit to the post—do it in conjunction with a bunch of other minor edits, or with a larger edit.

Also, as @Mego said, it's a good idea to leave a comment on the answer as well. Something like this might work:

I've removed the "non-competing" note from your post because languages postdating the challenge can compete.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Raw source of comment: I've removed the "non-competing" note from your post because [languages postdating the challenge can compete](https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12877/lets-allow-newer-languages-versions-for-older-challenges). \$\endgroup\$
    – boboquack
    Mar 10, 2018 at 9:31
2
\$\begingroup\$

Leave a comment if the answer postdates the rule change

If the answer is posted now that the “non-competing” rule is gone and has been marked as non-competive, that probably means that the author is not aware of the change of rule. In that case leave a comment with a link to the new rule.

It is true that the author doesn't get to decide whether the answer is competing or not but, I wouldn't go as far as editing the answer because of this.

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • \$\begingroup\$ Posted separately from this answer so that people can vote each proposal independently \$\endgroup\$
    – Luis Mendo
    Mar 9, 2018 at 22:10
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "I wouldn't go as far as editing the answer because of this." Why not? If it's done in conjunction with other edits, all you're doing is removing a label that no longer has any meaning (and that we didn't allow them to add anyway). \$\endgroup\$
    – Esolanging Fruit
    Mar 9, 2018 at 22:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @EsolangingFruit I see editing an answer as somewhat intrusive, except for small stuff like typos. I'm not sure this qualifies as small stuff to me \$\endgroup\$
    – Luis Mendo
    Mar 9, 2018 at 23:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ Is there any potential reason why the user would object to the change? \$\endgroup\$
    – Esolanging Fruit
    Mar 10, 2018 at 0:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ It's a significant change, so I think it's better to let the author do it. For example, they may want to remove the "non-competing" note but add a "language postdates the challenge" note. I personally don't agree 100% with the new rule, so leaving a note along those lines may be a good compromise, if the author thinks like I do \$\endgroup\$
    – Luis Mendo
    Mar 10, 2018 at 0:22
-3
\$\begingroup\$

Don't edit if the answer predates the rule change

If the answer was non-competing at the time of writing as per the rule that was in force then, I see no point in changing it now.

This is similar to how we don't close an old challenge just because it doesn't conform to some current, more stringent rule.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ Posted separately from this answer so that people can vote each proposal independently \$\endgroup\$
    – Luis Mendo
    Mar 9, 2018 at 22:09
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "This is similar to how we don't close an old challenge just because it doesn't conform to some current, more stringent rule." Right, except in this case our rules didn't get more stringent, they got more flexible, which means that the answer would have been competitive had it been posted today. Leaving open historical questions that would have been closed today is arguable, but having NC answers that would have been competing today is imo absurd. \$\endgroup\$
    – Esolanging Fruit
    Mar 9, 2018 at 22:56

You must log in to answer this question.

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