it's being overused.
What? You don't find my title helpful? You had no idea what you were going to read before you opened the question...I see.
This site is getting on the Stack Exchange Hot List a lot lately! I've been clicking over fairly often and finding good stuff to read. I'm also finding quite a bit of this:
My answer is:
the mastofan must have looked for the plumtin on the blask but not seen it there, since you imply that nothing has emergated since the last derotiring.
This is (as I opined more bluntly elsewhere) not a particularly useful post.
Answerers using markup like this have a courteous goal: they want to avoid giving away a puzzle's solution for readers so that those readers can work on it themselves. I do appreciate that, but I think this is entirely the wrong way to go about it.
The thing is, the above isn't any better for me as a reader than this:
The mastofan must have looked for the plumtin on the blask but not seen it there, since you imply that nothing has emergated since the last derotiring.
because I still only have the choice to read all of the answer, or none of the answer.
If it's really considered necessary to use spoiler markup here, it's totally possible -- even easy -- to hide the kernel of the answer but reveal all the surrounding sentence structure so that a reader can follow along. Doing this gives me a very clear idea about what kind of thing is hidden without knowing what that thing is.
The mastofan must have looked for the plumtin
on the blask
but not seen it there, since you imply that nothing has
since the last
Granted, all the linebreaks are a bummer. Inline spoilers would be nice. But a taller answer is still preferable, to my mind, to one that has no visible content.
I'm obviously not a active posting member of this site (goose egg there), but I have become an avid consumer of it. I'm writing from that perspective.
I've suggested a number of edits over the last couple of days to try to help out, and set an example for good spoiler usage. Here's three in particular that I think show well what I'm getting at:
In that last one, the current version of the answer still hides too much information in my opinion. I link it specifically to contrast with what I think would be ideal.
I'd like to propose, though I know there's plenty of other stuff the site is worried about, that in addition to explanations the visible content of an answer be taken into consideration for quality judgement purposes. I'd suggest that this doesn't even require voting, and it is in fact a much easier thing to work on, since it just means active but judicious editing (which even people like me who aren't posing puzzles can help out with).
What do you say? Is this a good standard, and are edits of this nature positive for the site?