user69: Recently there has been some code formatting appearing in answers for emphasis and highlighting.  A couple of comments have been left by myself and Mad Scientist, and I began editing the formatting out before coming across this previous discussion between MadSci and Lo Sauer.
At least three community users have expressed disagreement with this practise (myself, MadSci and the upvoter of Mad Scientist's comments), however Lo Sauer makes the valid point that "Unless it is explicitly prohibited, I will prefer that formatting."
Do we need to explicitly prohibit it as well as the implicit don't do this it looks terrible that exists currently?
A further point for discussion would be the issue raised by Lo Sauer in his rollback "reverted to initial formatting... terms or phrases are highlighted; "see: How To Edit: always respect the original author" thanks".

user166: It’s horrible style. But it’s not the users’ fault, it’s the software’s fault: why does the editor offer code formatting with a convenient shortcut at all?
On a biology site this is weird enough. But it’s even present on a cooking site. Stack Exchange utterly failed to adapt their site’s interface to a non-programmer audience. This needs to change. It’s no use trying to re-educate the users when the interface makes it so convenient and tempting to be misused.

user69: Personally I think this is not the way the system was designed to be used and makes the post body hard to read and not flow well.  
Furthermore I would strongly contest the viewpoint that altering the style of emphasis used (which is distinct from altering the emphasis itself) is in no way not respecting the original author when editing.
With that in mind I move to explicitly state that this usage is not acceptable, I would imagine that thsi is the view of the majority of the community however will post to allow a definite voting period.

69: <p>Recently there has been some <code>code formatting</code> appearing in <code>answers</code> for <code>emphasis</code> and <code>highlighting</code>.  A couple of comments have been left by myself and Mad Scientist, and I began editing the formatting out before coming across <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/1354/why-is-methylcellulose-used-in-pharmaceuticals/3676#comment5574_3676">this previous discussion</a> between MadSci and Lo Sauer.</p>

<p>At least three community users have expressed disagreement with this practise (myself, MadSci and the upvoter of Mad Scientist's comments), however Lo Sauer makes the valid point that "Unless it is explicitly prohibited, I will prefer that formatting."</p>

<p>Do we need to explicitly prohibit it as well as the implicit don't do this it looks terrible that exists currently?</p>

<p>A further point for discussion would be the issue raised by Lo Sauer in his <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/revisions/3676/3">rollback</a> "reverted to initial formatting... terms or phrases are highlighted; "see: How To Edit: always respect the original author" thanks".</p>
 166: <p>It’s horrible style. But it’s not the users’ fault, it’s the software’s fault: why does the editor offer code formatting with a convenient shortcut at all?</p>

<p>On a biology site this is weird enough. But it’s even present <a href="https://cooking.stackexchange.com/">on a cooking site</a>. Stack Exchange utterly failed to adapt their site’s interface to a non-programmer audience. This needs to change. It’s no use trying to re-educate the users when the interface makes it so convenient and tempting to be misused.</p>
 69: <p>Personally I think this is not the way the system was designed to be used and makes the post body hard to read and not flow well.  </p>

<p>Furthermore I would strongly contest the viewpoint that altering the style of emphasis used (which is distinct from altering the emphasis itself) is in no way not respecting the original author when editing.</p>

<p>With that in mind <em>I move to</em> <strong>explicitly state that this usage is not acceptable</strong>, I would imagine that thsi is the view of the majority of the community however will post to allow a definite voting period.</p>
