How do I go about resigning in a company that doesn't allow two weeks' notice? is a popular question -- 12k views, question at +64, top answer at +110, 10 answers. A couple of the answers have the "we're looking for long answers that explain" post notice, and some answers have been flagged. None of the answers really back up what they say with sources or experience, but that's probably due to the nature of the question. Most of them do explain their reasoning to some degree.

It's not real clear to me on this question where the line between "acceptable answer per our site rules" and "delete that" is. None of the annotated/flagged answers are egregious one-liners; they seem to offer some reasoning for what they suggest, though we could wish for more. Some of the other answers don't seem all that different in this regard. Yet some have drawn negative feedback and others have not.

So I'm asking for a review of this question and its answers. What should we do here (if anything), and, just as importantly, why? What guidelines apply to this collection of posts?

  • 1
    refer to this guidance in comments, add a mod notice "insufficient explanation". Wait for a week, return to answers and delete those that didn't address the notice (I can even flag these for you:)
    – gnat
    May 6, 2014 at 4:02
  • On which specific answers? I'm asking for a review of one question rather than a broader policy; we already understand the latter but implementation here is unclear. Thanks. May 6, 2014 at 14:29
  • I see. Question appears a tricky matter indeed. I read and re-read it and can't make my mind yet about "this collection of posts"
    – gnat
    May 6, 2014 at 14:34

2 Answers 2



The question has been unclear for a while. In current state, it looks okay and allows to evaluate answers based on regular quality norms.

When originally posted, question lacked important details mostly related to asker's employer and specifics of connection between employer and client. At this stage, it would be better to close the question until further clarification - doing so would help avoid answers based on wrong guesses about missing details (example).

This issue has been later corrected, first in the comments, next in question edit - so that as of now, there seem to be no reasons to close it (at least none that I could find upon several re-reads).

From the very first revision, question contained details that could be used to evaluate answers quality and legitimately delete one-liner answers as lacking explanation for what is asked about: "Would the 2nd option be considered disrespectful".

Above reads somewhat vague to me, but it was further clarified to reasonably solid shape, by explicitly stating what asker wants to achieve: "I want them to continue to like me for professional purposes (possible recommendations, in case our paths meet again, etc.)".

Regarding answers - as far as I can tell, in its current shape question allows evaluation based on regular site norms: whether an answer authoritatively addresses asker's concern, whether it matches the situation described and whether it complies with back it up and don't repeat others requirements.


The 2 answers that have the banners that have not been addressed should be deleted. They can always address the issues and flag to have them un-deleted if they correct the issues that lead to the banner in the first place. I would probably comment with something to that effect.

This answer ... has been properly handled by the community. I do not like the answer and think it is wrong, but it is a valid answer with an explanation of why. It has been downvoted by the community but I do not think it needs to be deleted through moderator action. If it happens to get several flags from the community asking for it I could see taking action, but the question is old enough I would be surprised if that happened.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .