Found this question in the review queue:

Best way to accelerate data access to two data warehouses?

and noticed that it is protected. As I understand it:

Questions should be protected when they are garnering lots of views and newbies are adding "me too!", "thanks!" and possibly even spam non-answers.

from https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/protect-questions

The question has 147 views and no answers. Is this the intended use of question protection? I would hate to see us overreach with preemptive protection.

1 Answer 1


There are two deleted answers on the question. The later one is complete nonsense, and I'm guessing is what triggered the protection.

That said, I do agree with you the protection here was a bit premature. Protecting a question goes against our promise that asking and answering is completely free and requires no rep. It's a last resort tool for questions that are attracting a lot of crap answers in a very short amount of time.

This clearly wasn't the case here, I unprotected the question.

  • "very short amount of time" part looks quite misleading. Only one (of two) automatic protection heuristics triggers by that, other isn't bound by time - not to mention manual protection which is left on discretion of 15K users and moderators
    – gnat
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 11:55
  • 1
    @gnat If the crap answers are not coming in rapidly, then we have much better ways of dealing with them than closing the doors to every new user ever.
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:07
  • read it once again Yannis - there are cases that are considered solid enough to trigger automatic protection without any time bounds. It's not my personal opinion, it's the system feature introduced to address real and frequent issues. To avoid misunderstanding, I don't challenge your unprotection in this particular case, merely point that part about "very short amount of time" doesn't feel right
    – gnat
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:13
  • Human users have better ways of dealing with crap answers (that aren't coming in rapidly). The automatic protection rules are irrelevant here @gnat (unless of course you are a bot).
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:30
  • better ways, can you tell me more about these. I'd like to learn how these ways work
    – gnat
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:44
  • For crap answers? Downvote them and vote to delete them @gnat. If the community agrees with your assessment, the answers will disappear soon enough. There's no point in protecting a question unless there's an actual flood of crap answers.
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:48
  • how it is better? more precisely, if it's better, why do you think protection feature was introduced at all?
    – gnat
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:53
  • 1
    @gnat The feature is there to help us when it's abundantly clear that normal moderation won't cut it. If we can deal with the crap answers with our other tools, then there's no need for protection. Our other tools are better in that they don't stop new users from answering the question. We want new users answering questions, don't we?
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 12:59
  • SE doesn't promise (anymore) that asking & answering is free, see eg official response at What does “free” mean in “Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites” phrase? Given that, you may consider re-evaluating your belief that other tools are better or, more precisely, your understanding of the reasons for their superiority
    – gnat
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 13:07
  • 1
    I feel I have explained my position clearly enough for anyone who's actually willing to listen @gnat. Protecting a low view question for a couple of crap answers is an abuse of the privilege. I've went through your past protections, and I was sorry to find out that this wasn't an isolated incident. Please stop.
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 13:21
  • your position is flawed. As for "incidents" how you call these, I wonder why don't you bring these on meta to let community openly evaluate
    – gnat
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 13:25
  • @gnat your position is flawed. As a high-rep user, you have more say in how Programmers works, but you don't have complete executive oversight without accountability. Your "better to ask for forgiveness than permission" attitude toward your privileged position seems like poor leadership. Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 13:44

You must log in to answer this question.

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