Maybe it's not a case when talking about Mr Blankman, who rarely answers, but I was kinda shocked when I find out that there is 50 questions limit, while it is encouraged to answer Your own questions. (But I understand why now)

There are new things being developed all the time, in many already invented there are people lacking understanding of many things. What if someone would take up the glove, made some "FAQ's" and exhaustingly answered many of major questions in some topic, greatly explaining how things works, then he find out that his desire to help others gave him nothing but blockade and inability of ask when he is the one who needs help?

Shouldn't such a contribution be, if not honoured, at least not penalized? Maybe if someone answers his own questions and it is favoured by community (like many up-votes in short period of time), they shouldn't count into this 50?

I understand that even such a system can be abused and someone's answers on his own questions can have very low quality. But if we would find a fine way to distinguish one from another, what do you think about this? It can have a future. Wouldn't it be more useful and encouraging for people who would contribute a lot in this way, and also for these who only ask a lot to contribute something more instead? ;)

Maybe it's not a case when talking about Mr Blankman, who rarely answers, but I was kinda shocked when I find out that there is 50 questions limit, while it is encouraged to answer Your own questions. (But I understand why now)

There are new things being developed all the time, in many already invented there are people lacking understanding of many things. What if someone would take up the glove, made some "FAQ's" and exhaustingly answered many of major questions in some topic, greatly explaining how things works, then he find out that his desire to help others gave him nothing but blockade and inability of ask when he is the one who needs help?

Shouldn't such a contribution be, if not honoured, at least not penalized? Maybe if someone answers his own questions and it is favoured by community (like many up-votes in short period of time), they shouldn't count into this 50?

I understand that even such a system can be abused and someone's answers on his own questions can have very low quality. But if we would find a fine way to distinguish one from another, what do you think about this? It can have a future. Wouldn't it be more useful and encouraging for people who would contribute a lot in this way, and also for these who only ask a lot to contribute something more instead? ;)

Maybe it's not a case when talking about Mr Blankman, who rarely answers, but I was kinda shocked when I find out that there is 50 questions limit, while it is encouraged to answer Your own questions. (But I understand why now)

There are new things being developed all the time, in many already invented there are people lacking understanding of many things. What if someone would take up the glove, made some "FAQ's" and exhaustingly answered many of major questions in some topic, greatly explaining how things works, then he find out that his desire to help others gave him nothing but blockade and inability of ask when he is the one who needs help?

Shouldn't such a contribution be, if not honoured, at least not penalized? Maybe if someone answers his own questions and it is favoured by community (like many up-votes in short period of time), they shouldn't count into this 50?

I understand that even such a system can be abused and someone's answers on his own questions can have very low quality. But if we would find a fine way to distinguish one from another, what do you think about this? It can have a future. Wouldn't it be more useful and encouraging for people who would contribute a lot in this way, and also for these who only ask a lot to contribute something more instead? ;)

Maybe it's not a case when talking about Mr Blankman, who rarely answers, but I was kinda shocked when I find out that there is 50 questions limit, while it is encouraged to answer Your own questions. (But I understand why now)

There are new things being developed all the time, in many already invented there are people lacking understanding of many things. What if someone would take up the glove, made some "FAQ's" and exhaustingly answered many of major questions in some topic, greatly explaining how things works, then he find out that his desire to help others gave him nothing but blockade and inability of ask when he is the one who needs help?

Shouldn't such a contribution be, if not honoured, at least not penalized? Maybe if someone answers his own questions and it is favoured by community (like many up-votes in short period of time), they shouldn't count into this 50?

I understand that even such a system can be abused and someone's answers on his own questions can have very low quality. But if we would find a fine way to distinguish one from another, what do you think about this? It can have a future. Wouldn't it be more useful and encouraging for people who would contribute a lot in this way, and also for these who only ask a lot to contribute something more instead? ;)