I've noticed that there are some users on EL&U who ask many questions, but rarely (or never) accept any of the answers given.
It appears that I am not the only one who regards such behaviour as a poor way of acknowledging the effort that others have made to research and craft a good answer. Recently, Janus Bahs Jacquet posted this pertinent comment under one question:
If you feel any of the answers given adequately answers your question, you should choose it as the accepted answer. If not, you should edit your post to clarify what is lacking. Accepting an answer is a good way, in addition to votes, of helping future readers judge the merits of an answer. Currently, only three of your 15 asked questions have accepted answers; you should consider being more proactive in accepting what you feel is the best answer given when you ask a question.
This brings me to my suggestion.
This is that once a person has asked more than (say) twenty questions, the system should block them from asking any more until they have accepted answers for at least one third of the questions they have already posed.
I feel that my suggested thresholds:
- adequately allow for the likelihood that not all questions will elicit answers that are good enough to be accepted
- also acknowledge the fact that if they are good, a substantial proportion of questions will almost inevitably receive some good answers
- will motivate querents to improve their prior questions so that they subsequently attract better answers. This will also improve the overall reference value of the EL&U's Q&A repository.
What do others think?