I think it is good. It allows for more answers to come in and for the question to have a good exposure before jumping on the first answer that comes in.
2007-07-03 15:47:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by RexD 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
YES! it's so stupid because no one will answer a 4 hour long question anyways. It's wayyyyyy in the back of the "list"
It should be... 1 hour. Would be the perfect amount. Not tooo long but long enough to give "everyone a chance to answer"
I think that would be good? U think if we ALL wrote a complaint e-mail to yahoo about that they would change it? hm...
2007-07-03 23:13:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by CherryCherry 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeah, I think it should be 1-2 hours because 4 hours does seem a little long, although its so that you get more answers, and so that people could have more time to answer.
2007-07-03 22:48:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Evan A 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
They should let you choose, usually you have a best answer picked out long before the four hours are over.
2007-07-03 22:48:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by edingo 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I usually wait 2 days.
2007-07-03 22:48:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
4 hours doesn't bother me. It does give other people a chance to answer when it goes on the next pages.
2007-07-03 23:02:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by kitkat1640 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sorta, I like to give people a chance to answer. The longer you wait the more answers you get.
2007-07-03 22:51:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
yeah that's annoying but i think it should stay the same because sometimes you can get those really good answers after like 3 hours and 58 minutes lol
2007-07-03 22:46:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by cant§touch§this™ 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Yes it's a bit annoying but it used to be 24 hours a few months ago.
2007-07-03 22:49:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
i heard that it used to 24 hrs b4 u could pick BA
2007-07-03 22:47:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by rebelady28379 7
·
2⤊
0⤋