>This system makes the person arguably _least qualified_ to understand the situation the single arbitrator as to which answer is accepted.

Devil's advocate: If it fixed their problem adequately, it's acceptable.

Maybe separate "acceptable" and "ideal" answers would be a nice feature?

In the vast majority of cases, OP did not check (or even define) edge cases, race conditions, memory usage, network activity, etc etc etc.

Seems like the answer is to add a community accepted answer that's easier to change over time, while keeping the accepted answer feature as is.

>This system makes the person arguably _least qualified_ to understand the situation the single arbitrator as to which answer is accepted.

What is the argument for the OP being the least qualified?

The argument is probably that while they are the best qualified to know whether it solved their issue, they're not qualified about whether it was the best way to solve their issue, since they had to ask in the first place.

Of all the people involved, he was the one who _didn't_ know how to resolve a specific issue.

Well, they do know the tech stack, the domain, the specific problem. Now they know whether the solution resolved their specific problem, if their code review/testing caught any bugs, etc, etc.

If anything, they have the most amount of information in this context. I really don't think of them as being the least qualified.

Yeah there’s an argument for that. I think it’d hold more weight if narrow, specific, and loosely defined duplicate questions were allowed - but they aren’t.

Questions and answers belong to the community. I think the accepted answer should too - maybe after some period of time.

(or she :))

Why you always on about women, Stan?