10
\$\begingroup\$

In regards to this question: Should a player know their mount's exact HP?

I'm hesitant to upvote @fectin's answer. I agree with it completely, but feel it doesn't answer the question as fully as my own.

Meaning, from my experience the player should know the HP, but in the grand scheme of things, I feel consistency overrules and the GM/DM should make the ruling depending on the tone of the game they're playing.

Should I upvote it because I agree with it? OR should I downvote it because I don't feel it fully answers the question.

What's the etiquette for this sort of thing on SE?

\$\endgroup\$
30
\$\begingroup\$

You should upvote any answers that you feel contribute to the overall understanding of the topic and help the asker understand the situation. This includes partial answers, where the answer provides good and useful information about some of the question.

You should downvote bad or misleading answers.

On a site like Roleplaying, where many questions are about how to run games, some answers recommend play styles you might disagree with, but explain the philosophy behind them well. In this case, I'd upvote, or not vote at all if you feel strongly that the advice is bad (even though it's well explained).

To me, the only exception is where an answer includes only aspects of a previous answer, with no added value (additional discussion, clear formatting, images).

For the example in question, the two answers are both relevant. fectin's goes into detail about why they hold a certain absolute stance on the matter. Yours covers some of the question's additional details. They're both different answers that can be seen to contribute in different ways.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "aspects of a previous answer" - I hope that you make exception for answers posted in few minutes from each other, because they were probably written independently. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Feb 7 '17 at 9:52
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot Yes, for two identical good answers written at the same time, both will probably get voted up, and the better one might be accepted. By "previous" I mean one that existed before the new one was started. \$\endgroup\$ – Samthere Feb 7 '17 at 9:55
11
\$\begingroup\$

Aside from the other (excellent) answers, I'll add that I won't be offended in any way if you don't vote for my answer.

I feel strongly that there is a correct answer to the question asked, and hopefully my answer captures it, but SE overall is trying to create a curated collection of good answers. Your vote is part of that curation! You should vote/abstain/downvote based on whatever criteria make sense to you, and you don't need to apologize for or explain it.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ +1 "You should vote/abstain/downvote based on whatever criteria make sense to you, and you don't need to apologize for or explain it." The hallmark of democracy. Well put. \$\endgroup\$ – LegendaryDude Jan 31 '17 at 21:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm with you. That's sort of how I got into the comment discussion with LeesusFreak that looks to have been delete from the comment lines for that question. It basically went deeper into the whole HP discussion and how a Player knows his own Characters HP, or if that's meta-knowledge, and further how does a cleric know if the fighter requires a cure light or cure moderate. I came up with my answer based on his replies. I'm actually curious on why the comments were removed. \$\endgroup\$ – John Grabanski Jan 31 '17 at 21:16
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @JohnGrabanski Comments are regularly cleaned up, especially when they've become too conversational or don't contribute directly to the question/answer. They aren't permanent. \$\endgroup\$ – LegendaryDude Feb 1 '17 at 2:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JohnGrabanski see also why are site comments being deleted? and many other metas, related-linked therein, on the subject. \$\endgroup\$ – nitsua60 Feb 1 '17 at 3:56
7
\$\begingroup\$

Voting is subjective. While there are guidelines for how to vote (as seen in Samthere's answer), it is ultimately up to you to decide if an answer is helpful, unhelpful, or neither. Ultimately, how you vote as an individual matters very little as long as a majority of users are following the voting guidelines. If you disagree with an answer on principle, even if the conclusion is the same as what you provided in your own competing answer, it's okay for you to downvote if you think it isn't helpful in explaining why it was answered that way.

In general, as long as you are voting in good faith -- that is, you genuinely think an answer is or is not helpful and aren't voting out of spite or simply to boost your own answer -- then you shouldn't worry about the outcome, no matter how you vote. And the truth is, even if a few users vote spitefully the margin for error is small enough that votes from good faith users will override those negative votes and they'll get lost in the static anyway.

Stack Exchange is a democracy, so even if you think an answer is not helpful, there may be more than enough other votes to offset your not helpful vote with helpful votes. It's not up to each of us as individuals to decide if an answer is helpful or not; voting results are in fact greater than the sum of their parts.

Also, don't forget that you also have the option not to vote on an answer at all if you're torn. If an answer is good but needs that last little push to make it great, you can withhold an upvote until you feel the problem has been addressed.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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