Hot answers tagged

13

The space industry as a whole doesn't always make all of its sources publicly available. Furthermore, many of the things that we talk about on this site are hypothetical situations. Sometimes getting the data is almost impossible, or we are looking for a needle in a haystack. For instance, the first few questions I see from your search of me are the ...


5

Meh. This seems to be a nitpick about how the answer was worded. "There is a lack of evidence, but ..." or "Other spacecraft ..." or some other wording might be better received. No sources supporting an answer? Then don't upvote it. Is the answer outright wrong? Then downvote it. But I don't think that applied in this case. That ...


3

To me, a Stack Exchange site is a collaborative effort to generate good answers to on-topic questions, and to make those answers as visible and accessible as possible to future readers. Working toward that end while following rules and guidelines and accepted norms of a given site is just what we should be doing. There was a series of problematic questions ...


3

I don't understand how a factual answer can have intent... Go to meta FAQ and find What are the review queues, and how do they work? and see that one of the reasons that Stack Exchange provides for rejecting a proposed revision is: clearly conflicts with author's intent: it modified the post so that it may no longer be what the author meant it to be Stack ...


2

I suspect this is the purpose of the down vote. (...see what I did there?)


1

I ask a lot of questions on Space.SE (second only to uhoh). My personal belief is that I should not answer my own questions, unless necessary. The arguments against answering your own question include You have a jump start on others who may want to post an answer. It takes time to formulate an answer, search for sources to back it up, and write the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible