Question: When I posted different answers to a question, some people seemed to frown upon it.

[Is $G/pG$ is a $p$-group?](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/232526/is-g-pg-is-a-p-group)

Answer: 
Doctor, it hurts when I do this
-------------------------------

You're getting some push-back for something you're doing on the site. The feedback from other members prompted you to ask this question, but even prior to that *the software itself* gave you a bit of resistance when you went to add that second (and third) answer:

> 
> Are you sure you want to add another answer?
> 
> 
> You could use the edit link to refine and improve your existing answer, instead.
> 
> 
> 

Of course, it is *allowed* - there are times when it's very useful - but they're not common; generally, you do want to just edit your existing answer.

If you want feedback on your actions, explain their purpose
-----------------------------------------------------------

Let's ignore the abstract question here. As robjohn and Bill have pointed out in their answers, there are occasions when multiple answers are useful, and (many more) occasions where you really just want one answer. But that's not what you asked. You linked to *your* multiple answers, and a cursory examination makes one thing blatantly obvious:

**You aren't making any effort to explain why one answer might be preferable to another.**

There are often multiple ways to solve a problem. One of the big advantages of the Stack Exchange system is that, when posted as separate answers, the most *generally useful* solution can be ranked higher by those reading than the rest. However, this falls apart when there is effectively no difference, or when the difference is subtle. So... Which is it? You must've had a *reason* for bothering to write multiple responses - yet you didn't bother to include that reasoning in the answers themselves. It's almost as though you expect others to do this for you...

Asking - and answering - in good faith
--------------------------------------

Indeed, this meta question suffers from the same problem. Right before asking it, you posted this comment below one of your answers, in response to specific criticism of your answering strategy:

> 
> @CameronBuie Maybe someone would down vote for a false proof. This is only an example. There are other confusing factors. As for your last comment, I didn't get any reps. Anyway, what's wrong with separate answers? – Makoto Kato
> 
> 
> 

Uh, yeah, *maybe* that would happen. Is that what you hoped would happen? Being unsure of one or more of your proofs, you posted them separately so as to elicit specific critiques of each? **Then why not *say* that?** And when raising the discussion of a specific scenario here, one already under discussion elsewhere, why not summarize your already-stated rationale for doing what you're doing, rather than leaving folks to debate the general case? There's a time and a place for everything - but what you're really concerned with here is, *was [this](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/232526/is-g-pg-is-a-p-group) the right time and place for multiple answers?*

Frankly, I think you would garner a lot more sympathy - or at least *understanding* - if you were a bit more transparent as to your intent when you engage in activities that are *uncommon* on this site. Don't assume that others will assume good intentions on your part, and you may find they're a bit more likely to do just that in the future.
The issue here is with reputation farming. Therefore, if you wish to post multiple answers and do not wish to suffer any hopstilities from anyone there is a simple solution.

> 
> Have one "main" answer. Make the rest community wikis.
> 
> 
> 

If you are not simply after reputation then you should have no issues with this, and noone can criticise you for it. Simples!