Am I being too picky about what is an "accept-worthy" answer?

Question

In looking back over questions I have asked at various SE sites, I was reminded of how rarely I accept answers. While part of this may be asking difficult questions (and waiting for other answers does allow one to forget to accept), I suspect most of the cause is that I want a perfect answer, one that is obviously correct and complete.

My specific concern is for my question "Is Christianity more friendly to its own Scripture translation than other religions? If so, why?".

Mawia's answer is decent, it was upvoted three times (and not by me yet), it gives some historical context which was not in the speculation included in my question. However, it mainly addresses part of the why; it does not give evidence that the Bible is more translated (e.g., by giving counts of language translations of other "sacred texts" relative to follower count or economic factors--admittedly literacy is, I suspect, part of the Christian bias, though Judaism probably has at least as high a rate of literacy and the Torah is probably not broadly translated).

(I would count Mawia's answer as the "most helpful/useful" of the currently provided answers, but it isn't perfect! Sigh.)

(I probably am a bad citizen for not posting a comment to that answer indicating that addressing this aspect would be an improvement.)

While I realize that acceptance is a matter of personal opinion, I hope that some further guidance can be given both on this specific question and the more general issue.

Related Meta Question

Is it ok to have 0% accept rate? (Caleb's answer was somewhat comforting.)

Weakly Related Meta Question

Stating there's still room for a better answer

Answer 1

Please feel no pressure or compulsion to accept answer.

It's not required and is a very personal choice.

Personally I will object to anyone trying to pressure someone else to accept an answer (I'm far more likely to try to persuade someone to unaccept an answer rather than accept one).

By accepting too early you essentially say "we're done here let's move on" to folks who stop by later. If you believe there is a better answer out there, then don't accept an answer. Maybe never.

A few months ago, SE removed the visibility of the accept rate statistic. The reason they did this was because it actively discouraged folks from answering questions by people who don't accept answers. This was not in the spirit of the network and as such the feature was removed. IE: accepting is not required and should not mechanically discourage folks from answering your questions.

Last thing, accepting an answer doesn't necessarily mean that it's right, it's just that it's most useful to you. If you find an answer that meets that, then maybe it's time to accept. But again, don't ever feel obligated to accept an answer.

Answer 2

During my first few days in Christianity.SE, I was hungry for points. I accepted the answers because I get two points in return, but I always waited for at least two days for better answers to come. However, on some questions, I was not satisfied with the answers and simply left it unaccepted, or write my own answer.

Now that I have enough points, I become more skeptical and demands better and well sourced answers. I don't just accept them anymore. I accept only when the answer is well written with proper sources. I never accept answers just because I agree with it.

It is good to accept answers. It's a way of saying 'thanks' in S.E. But it is not compulsory.