How to get an up to date answer for old questions with obsolete answers?

Question

Explanation whether duplicate or not --> see end of post.

Imagine you have a question about a game. You first search for it and find it answered a long time ago. Back then the answer was correct, but since then the game mechanics changed several times, so that it is now outdated and obviously wrong for the current version of the game.

How is it possible to get the very same question answered for the current version of the game?

In my case I just asked the same question again (What is the rule of how many new quests you get at one day in Hearthstone 4.X?). But the moderator said this does not comply with the policy (Outdated Answers Due to Patches), which in this case says, that I am supposed to update the answer of the old question.

But I have just the same question and not a new answer for that! Besides a bounty, I don't see another possibility to direct the attention of people to the old question again. And if I haven't enough reputation, I would not be able to put a bounty anyway. It cannot be the solution to wait for a new answer to the old question, can it? So if somebody was new here, it seems to be impossible for her/him to get an up to date answer to the old question. Is that right?

If yes, wouldn't it be reasonable to change something? Maybe it should be possible to mark outdated answers and move questions to the top again. Of course after some approval. Just an idea...

There is a very similar question (How should we deal with out of date questions/answers?) as suggested in the comments, but the answer is not applicable to my case. The accepted answer in this thread just suggests to edit the question and write new or edit existing answers. But I have exactly the same question, but no answer for it. So I cannot take the actions suggested in this thread.

EDIT 1

Here I would like to explain why this post might be a duplicate, but is necessary anyway (Please excuse my poor English, I am not a native speaker)

This question might be a duplicate, yes, but this is what the topic of the post is about. There is currently no way to get answers to a very same question which was asked before, but the answers became wrong and outdated in the meantime, due to game patches etc. The policy suggests here and here (same links as above) that the old answers and/or questions are supposed to be edited. To edit the question doesn't make sence, because I have the very same question. And in my opinion there is no point of editing the answers either, because on the one hand I don't know the answer, because I am searching for it, and on the other hand who will notice if I put a warning that the answer is wrong?

Who might notice:

• The original authors, who might not know the answer.
• Users searching for the answer to the question, who don't know it, either.

I think there is a lack of the possibility to direct all users attention to an old question which needs a new answer. It must be the attention of all users, because it is much more likely that one of them knows the answer compared to just the few people which were involved in the thread back then. Of course an expensive bounty is one solution, but not everybody can afford a bounty. Besides the bounty, the only possibility is to ask the very same question again, which is not allowed by the policy. We need something else!

Ironically, the very same thing is currently happening to this meta post, since there were already answers to quite similar questions. But the answers of those cannot be applied to the case I described. That is, why I think it is important to discuss it again and why I think, the existing threads are not enough (because almost nobody cares about / notices old threads = the problem what this post is about).

Answer 1

I think it's pretty clear from the comment votes that the only thing we all agree on is there is a problem here.

In a perfect world, a new question is asked, marked as a dupe, asker either a) comments on the original answer to say it's out of date or b) complains on their dupe loudly enough that someone does it for them (if their rep is too low, for example). The author of that answer gets a notification and updates the answer. We close the dupe, everybody wins.

Equally perfectly, the author of the original question notices the comments on the answer, and removes the checkmark. When a correct answer is posted, they accept the new answer.

I don't think I'm risking too much by saying we can all agree the best case is either of those two (or something very close to them).

That's not always going to be the case, and we need a policy for when this stops working. Let's briefly go over the rationale for my proposal.

I don't like editing the accepted answer because the votes go to the wrong place. If the editor is wrong, they have nothing to lose. Clearly if the answer is abandoned, the author doesn't care what happens to their rep, so why should a third party edit net them more or dock them? And if we edit in a disclaimer, why let the incorrect information stand? That doesn't seem to be in line with the spirit of our edit policies, at least not to me.

Bounties are great, but it puts too much onus on to few users. I just hit 3K, I'm not placing any bounties that will lose my voting privileges. It seems to be a trend that folks with extremely high rep forget how much of what you can do is based on relatively high rep scores. 200 rep is a lot when you have 3K.

Finally, down-voting simply doesn't work, if the answer has been abandoned, that original author doesn't care. All the reasons bounties are subpar apply here as well.

If it becomes clear to reasonable members of the community that the accepted answer to an abandoned question is both out of date and abandoned by it's author, we should delete the answer. What flag to raise could be debated, but I say we use "moderator attention." We normally shy away from one user making categorical statements about accuracy, but that's because we rely on the voting system to make sure the good stuff rises to the top. The system falls apart on mature questions, for a two simple reasons. First, a question with an accepted answers will draw less view from the community, which gives less chance for those down-votes or a new, accurate answer. Secondly, rather than starting at zero like normal, the answer "starts" with up-votes.

We have a responsibility to prune old information from the site, especially when that old information is inaccurate. We've yet to have an actionable policy about this, and we truly need one with the games of today. So please, if this proposal is unacceptable to you, let's work on hammering one together. Our band-aid fixes won't keep working forever.

(I'm aware the question that spawned this has been taken care of, and if you think this meta had absolutely nothing to do with that, well, I admire your faith in humanity. Me, I think it played a major role, so pointing to the question in question as an example of the system working doesn't hold much water with me.)

EDIT: I should really have slept on this before posting. I thought what I was saying was obvious, but it l clearly isn't.

I'm not proposing we immediately delete a question as soon as it's outdated. We'd first behave normally, commenting on the question and answer to give everyone a chance to correct it normally. If neither the author of the question nor the answer makes any change within some agreed upon grace period (7 days? 10? 14? I don't know, please suggest something, I'm here everyday, my perspective of reasonable is probably skewed), then and only then do we take steps to delete the accepted answer.

Answer 2

Our duplicate policy shouldn't apply to outdated questions

Stack Exchange works around votes and accepted answers, allowing good answers to rise to the top. This does not work as intended if answers earn votes then become incorrect.

In many cases, the asker of the old question is no longer an active user. This means that even if the updated answer is posted, and it gets enough attention and votes to rise above any other answers, it will always be below the accepted, incorrect answer.

Editing the correct answer into the accepted answer, which is often suggested, goes against our edit policies and means we allow users to attribute answers to other users. It also sets a dangerous precedent- if we edit outdated answers, what about incorrect answers?

Instead, users should be able to re-ask outdated questions and get the answers they need- that's what we're for, right? The old question should be closed or edited and linked to the new one if it gets a good answer.

Answer 3

I believe this meta is a duplicate of the following:

How should we deal with out of date questions/answers?

The concerns and answers provided cover the concerns highlighted by the OP of this meta.

If the question is still relevant, but in some way no longer accurate, it should be edited to reflect the current reality. Answers can then be edited, or a new answer written as needed.

This will allow for amendments, where appropriate, to be made to the question. More importantly, it allows for incorrect answers (due to a patch) to be given a disclaimer.

If the question is abandoned, and the accepted answer is inaccurate and it is unlikely for the accept to be moved, editing it to add a disclaimer notifying readers about that fact and pointing them to a newer answer is considered the Right Thing To Do.

As above, but addresses concerns where the accepted answer does not change.

The OP is concerned moreso (in my opinion) with the possibility that no one will answer the question without a new question being added. However, any edits will bring the question to the top of the active questions list. Edits will notify the original asker, and to people who answered the original question. They may also be the ones with the expertise to provide an updated answer.

A bounty can be used to promote a question, and an option exists to request for updated answer.

I think this still holds true:

I personally see no problem with this method, and don't see any reason that we need any sort of special mechanics to revoke acceptance or any such beyond the tools we already have.

Answer 4

If we're not closing new questions as duplicates because our existing answers are outdated, we're failing one of our core tenants: To cut the noise to signal ratio. By allowing them to exist, we will start versioning questions; how does this mechanic work in version 1? Version 2? Version 3? Are we really making the internet a better place by deliberately allowing duplicates because the current answers are outdated? Should we be duping the old ones to the new ones? We'll eventually end up with long dupe chains, and that's even worse for user experience and SEO. Now they have to follow a long chain to actually get their answer. Do we not dupe them at all? Now users have to troll through several versions of the same question, trying to find the correct one that applies to them. That's one of the exact things SE was created to counter, not encourage.

I subscribe to the late @MarkTrapp's answer: We expect more from established users, so that new users can get answers to their duplicate questions. If it's a dupe, dupe it. Then bounty the original. We're here to help curate the site; it's not the best solution, but it's much better than allowing duplicates to exist. It keeps all the answers in a single place, whether or not you can play the old versions.

If it's an online game, and an answer is no longer relevant because it's for an older version, use your downvotes. That's what they're for, after all; denoting that an answer is no longer useful. That will hopefully spur the answerer to update or delete their answer, and then everybody wins. In extreme cases, if an outdated answer is accepted, and an update or delete isn't happening, we can flag for mod removal. If not, the downvotes will indicate that an answer is no longer useful, and make it less likely for users to read it.

That's using the tools at our disposal to their maximum effect. We don't need to allow duplicates. We just need to expect more of ourselves.