This is so true. It's easy to get stubborn and not want the problem to defeat you, so you stick at it for hours, only to wake up the next day and the solution literally just pops into your head. Also, the other points people have made about talking the problem over OUT LOUD, with either a person or by yourself. That works wonders too. Something about being forced to express the problem clearly - such that someone else can understand where you're at - frequently unblocks the issue in your mind and the solution presents itself.

"And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being!"

Could we have a filter on number of votes, in addition to rating? Rating can get skewed by peer voting but you'd need to have a big arsenal of buddies to float to the top of the pile.

"And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being!"

He should re-apply for a job as a product engineer instead of QA, then he can change it and answer to the customers who don't like the change.

"And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being!"

I agree that articles should be written, even if they perhaps cover old ground, or state the obvious to many, or are duplicates of others. What I feel is missing from the site, is the ability to rate an article on its uniqueness, usefulness and relevance. I'm seeing far too many articles written these days which simply re-tell old stories, and often not very well. They appear to attract swarms who vote 5 across the board and risk muddying the ability to search for genuinely good, useful articles.

"And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being!"

Fan Boys is compulsory viewing for this topic ... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489049/[^]

"And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being!"