8

When we (users with enough reputation) protect questions, the standard text talks about "low quality answers", and it's a frequent thing that is done with very old questions which are resurrected to the front page either due to a new answer (like yours in this case) or because the question was linked offsite. These scenarios tend to lead to many low-rep ...


6

Protection racket Your own list illustrates how pointless this sort of proactive activity is: in most cases, few or no new answers were posted regardless of whether the questions were protected. Indeed, the most-answered question of the lot was immediately protected. It's not the raw traffic that creates the problem. It's traffic coupled with a question ...


5

This is by design: Users with 10 or more reputation can answer a protected question. However, the +100 account association bonus is ignored for this check, so you must have earned 10 or more reputation on that specific site to answer a protected question Related Auto-protect questions that get more than N answers from new users in a 24-hour period The ...


2

What happened is that two of the people answering got fairly quick upvotes on their answers. Enough to go over the 10 rep requirements. At that point, when a new answer comes in, those are excluded. This is working as designed - may need tweaking though.


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 ...


1

I think it may have to do with the protection/unprotection by a diamond the first day; see the revision history. This may have blocked the auto protection from kicking in.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible