Timeline for Unintended consequence of cheap downvotes and possible solutions
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 9:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.superuser.com/ with https://meta.superuser.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 9:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.superuser.com/ with https://meta.superuser.com/
|
|
| Nov 3, 2014 at 18:03 | comment | added | Ramhound | "I think the downvote ought to cost more to the person giving it." - This makes no sense. You want a downvote to cost more reputation to the person who is attempting to improve the community than the person who asked a question that deserves a downvote? It does not take much effort for the author to improve a question like this and remove the grammatical and spelling mistakes from it. Even without the grammatical and spelling mistakes my example isn't a good question. | |
| Nov 3, 2014 at 17:00 | comment | added | slhck Mod | See also: Should downvotes on questions be "free"? | |
| Nov 3, 2014 at 16:54 | comment | added | slhck Mod | Stack Exchange has actually removed the reputation penalty for downvoting questions a few years ago, so this is intentional. We want to have people vote more on bad questions. Votes are limited per day anyway, but users get extra votes for questions, precisely because they are so important. That includes downvotes. Finally, requiring comments for downvotes has been requested hundreds of times, but was always rejected on the basis that any nonsensical comment could also be left as an explanation, without a true benefit for the OP. | |
| Nov 3, 2014 at 16:48 | comment | added | allquixotic | Also, "SE" (whatever that means; there is no Q&A site for Stack Exchange, unless you mean meta.SE or Stack Overflow) does NOT require downvoters to leave a comment. You wrote, "SE requires a justifying comment on a downvote". This is incorrect. Their policy may strongly recommend it, but no technical feature is in place that requires it. Such a policy would likely be rolled out across the entire network, if it were ever implemented. | |
| Nov 3, 2014 at 16:46 | comment | added | allquixotic | Note that people with low rep can't even see close votes accumulating on their post until after it's put on hold. If you feel that the hold/close system is still too unfriendly, even after SE went to great lengths to make it more constructive and less hostile, I'm not sure what to tell you, but that's probably best discussed in a separate meta post, since it strays significantly from the original topic. | |
| Nov 3, 2014 at 16:45 | answer | added | allquixotic | timeline score: 4 | |
| Nov 3, 2014 at 16:31 | history | asked | music2myear | CC BY-SA 3.0 |