How do I write a good answer for MATLAB Answers?

Then give us documented reliable markup in comments...

I second that!

I know that you can edit by deleting, but it smells like a trick. It's obvious to the contributors to this page, but what about the people asking for homework help?

@Andrew: My message about pseudo-editing was not though for you only, but even for newbies.

Technically shouldn't Jan delete the comment about deleting meaningless comments now that Jiro has updated his post?

It drives me batty when the question is edited without an indicator that something has changed. I start to doubt myself, wondering why I said things or wondering if I didn't read the question properly the first time. Marking that something has been edited is important enough that it should not be a matter of discretion at the user level: _anything_ that gets edited should have an automatic update time-stamp put on it (possibly with an exemption for the moderators, though I cannot think at the moment of when such an exemption would be justified.)

@Walter: I agree that the timestamp should update so that at least there is an indication that there was an edit. But that would still require readers to scan and compare update times of questions/answers and comments to see which came first. Someone mentioned having a version history, but there was a comment on it about it creating more noise. Something to think about...
I can think of one case where there could be exemption for moderators -- for pure format editing. Sometimes you see a question with lines of code with no formatting. Moderators can fix that, and not change any of the words. That shouldn't trigger a timestamp change.

In practice, a time-stamp for reformatting does help.

When I as a user see an unreadable posting, I am reluctant to go back to it until I know it has been made readable.

When I as an editor see an unreadable posting, I might not have time to edit right then; if Matt or someone else gets to it first, then the time-stamp update relieves the pressure on me to push other things out of the way to do the editing.

I sometimes start an answer and then wander away -- back to work on my job, or researching a particular point, or going for supper, or simply giving my brain a rest, or giving myself a "time-out" so I can respond politely.

It would be a shame if everyone else was locked out for minutes or even overnight while I finished the answer (or decided to cancel.)

Also, the system would need to be robust against browser crashes or closing the browser or network problems.

@Walter: So the blocking should be "advisory" to avoid a deadlock - sorry, I've confused the terms. If I see, that *you* have started to answer, it is a good idea to wait, until you are able to respond politely or finished your coffee break.

Sometimes I fall asleep while composing responses. Literally at my desk sometimes, but more often if I have stretched out on the coach to see if I can come up with a new perspective.

If you put sufficient detail in the clarifying question, explaining the difference in meanings, then the clarifying questions themselves can become a framework towards getting the right answer.

Unless they are cycled out of sight by other comments ...

I agree. I think some very good contributors to this site let their frustration show sometimes. If they're getting jaded, they should consider taking a break and let some new people add to their reputation score.

You've said that before... but you didn't link to it!

Can we link to _Answers_ ? Or just to _Questions_ ?

Instructions for linking to individual Answers and even Comments are shown here: http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/994-wish-list-for-matlab-answer-sections#answer_1459

I think I understand this, but can you revise the wording?

Is that better?

The edit trap! Better than what?! No need to answer - I can guess it. But editing has the power to make the comments totally confusing.
While "work done so far" hits the point, "cover a specific MATLAB question" is not specific to homework cheats (see: how to use STRTOK...).

That depends a lot on what we deem the purpose of the forum to be. If it is to be a set of answers to very narrow and specific questions, then your proposal might be appropriate. It would, however, tend to lead to people asking effectively the same question over and over again, as the narrowness of the questions and answers would be such that most people would not understand how to apply the narrow answer to their situation.

My personal approach, of listing the various possible interpretation and answering to each of them, certainly takes more of my time. On the other hand, as it gives a template for recognizing the different circumstances and shows the approach needed for each of them, my answers tend to be applicable and recognizable by a number of people.

A more broadly spread answer that states assumptions is, in my opinion, a better long-term resource. And it leads itself to being linked to as a solution more often.

Are questions to be interpreted as "How do *I* do _exactly_ what is in front of me?", or are they to be interpreted and answered more generally as "What are good approaches to deal with this kind of situation?"

Also, some questioners just don't seem capable of writing a clear question, or respond slowly, or don't respond at all.

I think Derek has a point, especially if read as I say above with NOT ONLY in the statement. It is still subtle...

Derek's point echos a principle of good teaching: start with what the students know and then build on it.

It is unlikely there will _ever_ be enough of us to "illuminate" all the doit4me whose major project is due in two days.

Doug, I'm getting too old to be brief. Maybe if you'd caught me at about Grade 3, but my verbose ways were pretty much set in stone by Grade 5.

Invent time machine. Catch Walter in Grade 3.... nah. I like Walter's answers.

Brevity should be balanced with adequate explanation. Many answers just provide code that will be cryptic to novices.

A version history would contains outdated information, and therefore noise.

See the comments on Kenneth's answer.

I say, trust the question and ask the OP to change the title. An obvious example is question 822.

Whichever one is longer. ;)

Seriously though, this is probably a situation where asking for clarification is likely in order (example: http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/744-what-techniques-can-i-use-to-extract-horizontal-lines-from-noisy-image-data).