19
No, we should not be intentionally leaving questions open and unanswered. Too localized was removed as a close reason in 2013, so "this question is not likely to help somebody else" is not, by itself, a reason to close a question.
Whether or not you want to spend your own time answering a question like this is really up to you. We shouldn't intentionally ...
6
Nope. Answer acceptance is a complete optional action. It is not, and never will be, a requirement. The rep gain is minimal, anyways; two answer upvotes bypasses it.
2
The only questions which are at all a problem when inactive are unclear questions – as in, we need the asker to clarify their situation, but they're not responding, for whatever reason. Those we close as "unclear" after a polite delay. (Arguably, even a polite delay isn't necessary, but it's often done anyway.)
Everything else that doesn't yet have an ...
1
The question you provided as an example is basically yet another reason why the answer to your question is no. I mean, look at it: The question itself is certainly of no use for anyone else. But, as dly's answer points out well, the actual issue this person had is a very common one. Quite few people know that NBT data of items in filled chest slots needs to ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible