

Ask HN: Should StackOverflow lower the rep amount required to comment? - markcrazyhorse

Hey Everyone, If you don&#x27;t know. StackOverflow requires that you have 50pts of rep to be able to leave a comment on someones question.<p>So for example. John Smith has posted a question about a PHP error:<p>&quot;Hey guys, i&#x27;m getting an unspecified variable error on line 66, can you help me?&quot;<p>To which my comment would be:<p>&quot;Could you please post the some code?&quot;<p>However, having less then 50pts makes this impossible. I then have to leave it as an answer, which not only seems to anger everybody on SO for not being a proper answer but also isn&#x27;t what an answer section is used for.<p>So, What are you thoughts about this process? Do you agree or disagree? Care to elaborate?
======
joekrill
It's a trade-off. They're trying to avoid bad comments, spam, etc. It really
doesn't take much to get to 50 points -- just a tiny bit of participation. But
that requirement increases the likelihood that you're a real person, probably
not some troll, and willing to participate in the community in reasonably sane
manner. It reduces the amount of moderating that is needed, and makes the
community better as a whole, I think. I think it's perfectly reasonable.

------
sharth
There was a thread on meta.stackoverflow.com about this earlier this year:
[http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/252133/50-reputation...](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/252133/50-reputation-
points-to-make-comments)

~~~
markcrazyhorse
Ah, cheers for this. Still think it's a little stupid. They should maybe allow
comments before 50pts but then when someone views it with over 50pts they can
approve it.

