Why do we lose our privileges?
I don't particularly like the top answer on the most famous question:
What's the point of putting your reputation on the line for a bounty if there is no consequence of losing it?
This does not apply to privileges, so I have cut out reputation altogether. Much better!
What's the point of a bounty?
Bounties are for ...
Lemme play devil's advocate here... Is it so terrible if it does discourage activity? If someone wakes up in the morning, posts some great answers, hits the rep cap, and takes the rest of the day off (perhaps to do their job or spend time with family or cook waffles), is that necessarily a bad thing?
I mean... what's the worst-case? A question gets asked ...
Thanks for your interest in participating! The reputation system can be a little bit confusing at first, but rest assured - it's not that we think you aren't cool.
Start out by taking the tour. It explains all the basic concepts of how the site works. If you check out the privileges page you can see how much reputation each new privilege requires and how ...
Privileges are not permanent.
If your rep falls below the required threshold of a privilege for any reason (you place a bounty, downvotes, rep recalc, beta→gold site transition, etc) you do lose the privilege, but only until your rep increases above the required threshold again.
This is 100% status-bydesign. In fact, it's a core part of how Stack Exchange works.
The sort of questions you're seeing are what we call "canonical answers." It's an effort to build a knowledge base of information that's likely to be useful for many different people.
Self-answering is encouraged. If you figure out something cool that other people might ...
You can see and approve pending edits from others when you come across a post that has one suggested.
If you want to see the queue of pending suggested edits, you'll need to break through the 5000 reputation ceiling.
I have now reviewed around 7000 posts. Since I review mostly first / late answers (because I see the questions at the front page), you can more or less take this as a statistical sample of what really happens.
1032 edited (and they really needed to be edited)
387 were flagged (that's around 5.5%)
I don't think this is a lot. Of this 5.5%, ...
I would say post better answers, but I honestly can't find any answers that I'd take offense with. I just guess you answered questions which are low visibility, and where the user hasn't bothered to test the answers.
Why aren't posts getting votes?
While the views are from different IPs, most of them aren't even by registered users or users with the privilege to vote. If—quoting Jeff Atwood—90% of all visitors can't vote on the stuff they see, then this would explain the lack of votes quite easily. And I agree: It's sad to see good questions stick around with 0 votes.
Reputation is accumulated on a per-site basis. However, once you earn 200 rep on any site, you automatically get a +100 bonus on all other sites. This is because once you earn 200 rep the system trusts you enough to use basic features like voting and commenting on all of the Stack Exchange sites.
I can imagine a few reasons:
High reputation users have acquired a lot of knowledge—not only in a technical sense, but knowledge that helps them find an answer to their own problems more quickly. Writing good answers requires thorough research, and after contributing hundreds of answers you might be more efficient at solving your own problems, hence no need ...
He doesn't have enough reputation to downvote either questions or answers, so any downvotes are coming from another user.
Please see here in the Help Center which explains that a user requires 125 reputation on the site to cast downvotes on either questions or answers.
His comments will almost certainly result in him being banned (if that hasn't already ...
Comments serve an auxiliary function; they exist to support the all-important questions and answers. The goal is not to generate more comments, but better Q&A.
As such, you should assume that comments will be temporary; if you're putting information into a comment that would be nice to have around long-term, consider trying to work it into the question ...
"User was removed" indicates that a user voted for one of your posts had their account deleted - the account deletion is because either it was requested by them, or removed for other reasons(spam account destroyed etc).
As a result, all of their votes were undone, and the rep you gained/lost was reversed.
Since the upvote was removed, you lost the 10 rep
The reputation point system is really designed to ease people into learning to use the site effectively and eventually metamoderation tasks. While it shouldn't be punitive in theory, sometimes it is - especially when something is clearly out of scope. On main sites, question downvotes often indicate a lack of research, information, or something that simply ...
ooh. This is a strange one.
IANAL but I suppose the terms of service would be the thing to look at here. I don't see anything explicitly talking about transferring an account but
Subscriber is solely responsible for any use of or action taken under
Subscriber’s password and accepts full responsibility for all activity
conducted through Subscriber’s ...
You login into Super User (and by extension the wider Stack Exchange network) via 3rd party authorisation tools
Your Super User account is linked to other accounts you may have on the network.
This sounds like a really bad idea.
You have no way of disassociating your Super User account from the rest of your accounts. So if you handed over this ...
Super User is somewhat special in this regard, because its not that easy to get to 5 or 10k rep without posting a several hundred answers. That's why you have users like random and studiohack for a long time that are very helpful, but don't get any rep in return.
However, the argument of lack of overlap between rep and edits already shows why your ...
This is by design because the child metas don't really have the traffic for the reviewers to go through the queue.
Why can't I suggest edits on SE meta sites?
Mostly because the per-site metas are generally low traffic -- some of them count daily visits in the dozens.
That means the moderators will have to do the work, since the 10k site users ...
Your answer does not explain anything; it's just two sentences. There's more valuable information in the comments to your answer than in the post itself.
By all means, I see no reason it should not be downvoted – if only to encourage you to improve it. Just because you didn't receive any feedback doesn't mean your answer is without problems.
Note: The ...
It is normal. The original question (now a migration stub) is still here.
While the question exists here it has a downvote on it. That downvote counts. Downvotes on questions do not get migrated, but they do get left behind.
If the question is deleted on this site then it should reverse the downvote, but we don't immediately delete migrated questions so ...
You posted an answer recommending a website which has been previously spammed by multiple users.
Apart from that your answer:
Check that your F2 and F4 keys work!!
does not actually answer the question.
You reputation on a child meta is the same reputation you have on the main site. You have 201 reputation on Super User, and so you have 201 on Super User Meta. You cannot earn rep on any Meta, except for Meta Stack Overflow.
It's explained here.
The StackOverflow team believes that everybody's special in their own way and doesn't deserve to have a negative self-esteem (aka reputation).
A rep of zero or negative seemed cruel. Plus, everyone starts out as "a one" instead of "a zero".
The only way to really give users more reputation than a few upvotes is a bounty. If you really liked his answer, then you could suggest to him to post it again, or just go to his profile and upvote a few answers.
You cannot just give away reputation though, it can only be earned through questions, answers, bounties, and edits.
It is useful to determine commitment [...] to the site, but past a certain point [...] it ceases to mean that you are any more committed to the site, and just that you know things.
This is somewhat true. In a first instance, reputation doesn't measure how much you do for the broad community (in a sense of cleanup, or whatever you deem necessary). ...