In this question, it was required that one user gives an overview over 27 EU countries. People contributing only parts of the answer were downvoted. Is that justified? I can understand that 1-by-1 answers become tedious, but I think the simple approval of a complete answer should be enough instead of downvoting.
Is it justified to require a list of 27 items to be given by a sinlge user instead of several users contributing parts?
The accepted answer is short and clear.If everybody adds an answer with 1,2 or 3 countries there would be at least 15 answers, because I'm asking about whole Europe, not only EU.– Dirty-flowMar 5, 2013 at 15:26
For questions like this, partial answers are not desirable, as this lowers significantly the signal-to-noise ratio. As to whether they should be downvoted -- I wouldn't go as far as that, personally I'd leave such answers unvoted. However it's a prerogative of each empowered user to upvote and downvote as they see fit, and other users shouldn't be called out on their voting preferences. This doesn't serve anybody, and only creates unnecessary tension between users. All of us have received unjust downvotes at some point, and you should accept this as part of the game.
Admittedly, these answers were written before the author edited their question with a complete list as a requirement, so your answer was valid until the author edited their question. You should recognize their prerogative to do so as well, especially when the change was made in good faith.
1For the record, I did cancel the down votes.– user141Mar 5, 2013 at 15:28
I was more concerned with the direct threat of a down vote in case of partial answers than what happened in the thread during the process of answering the question. Since the threat was edited out eventually, I consider this issue as closed.– uncoveryMar 5, 2013 at 15:47