Downvotes on their own are terrible mentoring. They lack context on their own for a new user, and much like puppies, some other input is needed.
While comments are transient, in many cases pairing them with downvotes (or adding downvotes after a comment) may be efficient. I try to use positive reinforcement here and often comment rather than downvote, ...
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.
If you don't know an answer, why don't you simply pass-by?
Your meta-question (quoted above) is based upon the assumption that the question you asked on the main site meets our criteria for what a valid question is.
IF you asked a question that is:
Answerable (with something other than opinions),
Focused on an actual problem you're having,
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 ...
Comment upvotes are... special. They don't actually really mean anything (I seem to recall, at most a badge). On the other hand, comments are a useful way to extract and elicit more information from an OP, or to suggest something too minor to be a question on its own. A comment upvote is just a way to say "this comment added something" (and we don't downvote,...
Ask a question
If it's good you get THREE upvotes... and you can upvote.
Post ONE good answer
Have it voted up, just TWICE, or get it right... and you're there.
Link an existing account
If you already have a Stack Exchange account elsewhere with at least 200 rep and you link it, you get 100 reputation!
It isn't that hard to get 15 reputation. ...
From your comment, it seems like your real question is:
Why are some simple questions 'hot' while other more interesting, or involved questions get nothing?
Certain questions just seem to "hit a chord" with the community, by receiving a lot of clicks. A few general observations:
Questions which only apply to a few users, and which most people don't care ...
Executive summary: commenting to explain downvotes is a very good thing to do. Doing that consistently is far more important than shooting for any up/downvote ratio. Fortunately, we also have plenty more upvotes going around than downvotes.
There's been some confusion regarding the statistics used in the question and its answers, so I'll take a moment to ...
This is a personal reflection. I recognize that a substantial part of SU's strength is that we are not all the same. But this is what I think when I see down votes in certain contexts:
My first beef is questions which are not spam with downvotes and no comments. Especially on questions from new users and low score users, this just raises my hackles.
Before drawing any conclusions, I thought it was best to compile some data pertaining to Super User voting trends.
I decided that one good method would be to examine the tendencies of our most active community members. Essentially, their proactive nature helps them (along with our moderators) serve as the public face of the Super User community. I ...
If you have the reputation for it, you can create a bounty, starting at 50 reputation. Rewarding an existing answer is one of the preset reasons for creating a bounty. You can award the bounty manually to the existing answer you want to reward.
Some users link to their personal website or blog in their user profile. Maybe you can find something there: One ...
Here's a list of similar / duplicate requests on the main Meta.StackOverflow site:
Shouldn't a rep-less newbie at least be able to upvote a good answer to his/her own questions?
Allow upvote for <15 rep users on own questions [closed]
Allow new users to vote on answers they've received [closed]
Why is 15 reputation required to upvote?
I guess you can ...
Here are the hard facts:
Your question was posted at 16:35:45Z
Your first upvote was received on 16:35:51Z
That's quite fast indeed. I'm pretty sure the person who upvoted you didn't read the question in its entirety. But since moderators cannot see who voted for which post, we'll never know who that person was or what made them vote so fast.
How do we prevent the occasional bad upvote?
We don't need to.
That question was fairly quickly closed. At time of closure, I saw that it had only one positive upvote, with however many mod flags and vtcs.
Perhaps - as I speculated in a comment - someone had seen the previous iteration and voted it up for the humour of it being reposted under the correct ...
Voting down has the meaning that the post is of a very low quality; but it's still frequently used with a meaning of "I don't agree with it", "it doesn't work for me". This is nor different for the answers of your own question (an answer not solving your problem can still be very helpful for others with similar problem).
Until reaching 125 rep for the ...
My highest rated answer over at Gaming.SE is simply telling someone to try clicking the other button on their mouse. Sometimes simple answers garner the most reputation for their blunt/straight shooting honesty.
If no answer has been accepted for a question that you answered, then poke the person who posted the question. It will help other users of the site if the person ends up accepting the solution that worked (even if it ends up not being your answer that is accepted).
Occasionally I review some of my old answers to see if they are still good answers and to ...