Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 157 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

Possible Duplicate:
Indicate How Trustworthy the UpVotes Are

What if, instead of having a hard-coded value of how much rep a person gets per upvote, if the amount an upvote is worth is scaled by the rep of the person doing the upvoting?

Example scale of rep to upvote weight:

  • 1-49: 1
  • 50-199: 2
  • 200-249: 3
  • 250-499: 4
  • 500-999: 5
  • 1000-1499: 6
  • 1500-1999: 7
  • 2000-2499: 8
  • 2500-2999: 9
  • 3000-4999: 10
  • 5000-9999: 11
  • 10000-14999: 12
  • 15000-19999: 13
  • 20000+: 15

Please, this is just a thought and meant for discussion and not a request (unless someone high up really likes the idea).

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by random Sep 9 '11 at 23:59

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

    
Since random didn't give a dupe #, I'll just add meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13237/… – jcolebrand Sep 10 '11 at 0:07

I think this is a bad idea.

Imagine that I have a decent amount of reputation gained in a particular area, lets say T-SQL.

Why should my reputation gained as a T-SQL "expert" carry any more weight when voting on C++ questions than the person who has half my overall reputation but yet has forgot more about C++ than I ever will know or want to know?

share|improve this answer
    
true, but it's also proven that you are good at providing acceptable questions, answers, and comments on the site. – DForck42 Sep 9 '11 at 21:50
5  
Yes but in a different area. The fact that someone is an expert in one area doesn't mean they're able to offer a useful opinion in another area, and therefore, the idea that their opinions should carry more weight than someone else's in that area is flawed. – RobM Sep 9 '11 at 21:56

This would imply reputation is a measure of knowledge and/or skill, when that's not actually how reputation works:

Reputation is a rough measurement of how much the community trusts you

And finally, this makes the system too complicated. For starters, if you receive an upvote from someone who has 1 rep now, should that change when him or her gets more rep?

share|improve this answer

I've been thinking about that too, but I like it better the way it is - a constant.

I believe this "weight" system might make people more reluctant to vote as they gain more rep, knowing that their vote carries more weight. While the more reputation a person has earned, the more likely that person will be to distribute his/her votes in a way that is beneficial to SO.

It would, however, make it more difficult to gain rep by setting up fake accounts to update one's own questions, or asking non-programmer friends to make accounts to upvote one's postings. It is my impression that these things don't happen very often, so this "defense" is not needed.

Therefore, I think we should not do this.

share|improve this answer
    
There is a system in place to handle your second scenario. – NullUserException อ_อ Sep 9 '11 at 21:56
    
Not surprised... but still glad to hear it. – S.L. Barth Sep 9 '11 at 22:00

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .