Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 153 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

This question was posted on, but since it deals with the general StackExchange environment, I am reposting it here for some feedback.

Reputation may be viewed "by post" or "by time" (or "graph"): enter image description here

When viewing the reputation "by post", multiple activities per post is expandable (by clicking the down arrow):

Reputation view by post

However, this is not the case when viewing reputation "by time":

Reputation view by time

There is some aggregation, but it is not expandable. Why is this? I would think the format is easy to manage since the hook is on the post, which makes grouping an intuitive option. However, what do you group under when it comes to time? Has there been some consideration to accommodate some time-wise grouping? Or perhaps just leaving the reputation expanded?

share|improve this question
See Nick's response on TeX.SX. – Werner Jan 22 '12 at 15:38
up vote 5 down vote accepted

When it is by post, you can expand because there is a second level of grouping possible by time. When it is by time, there is no second distinct value to display the values that would require an expand option.

When you choose by post you can see at 17:13, you got 3 upvotes on question 123 instead of having that data being repeated three times.

+30 17:13 upvote

Personally, I don't think that I would like to see it the following way. Even if an expand option is provided, you would see the same rows repeated in the following manner. There is no distinction between the rows here. It would appear as if the rows are being shown repeatedly.

+10 17:13 upvote
+10 17:13 upvote
+10 17:13 upvote

I believe that is the reason for difference.

share|improve this answer
The rows could have different times, though, which I suppose is the complaint here. Currently it's "by time, with rollup" instead of purely "by time." The rollup can break up the timeline a little, so that upvotes that have been aggregated into a single record may represent events before and after a record below them. – Tim Stone Sep 10 '11 at 0:34
@Tim Stone: I was trying to understand what you meant by rollup. After looking at the screenshots, now I understand what you mean. The three upvotes that show up against 17:13 were not cast exactly at 17:13 but at 16:46, 17:06 and 17:13. These three votes are rolled up to display as +30 against the last cast time, which is 17:13. Anyways, I am used to seeing it this way. If I want to see the exact time, I can still switch to by post. – user162697 Sep 10 '11 at 0:44
Yep. Then you run into situations like this. You can see that the two upvotes that were grouped into the +20 were actually one upvote before and one upvote after the upvote on the other post. I personally don't consider it a huge issue, but I can see where it gets a bit confusing. – Tim Stone Sep 10 '11 at 0:51
@Tim Stone: You are the best bug finder I have come across here at Meta. I take your word. I guess that the grouping can be simply left at the minute level instead of rolling it up but again I like the summed up value. – user162697 Sep 10 '11 at 0:55
Hahah, I'm not sure about that. As for the grouping, I prefer the summed up value too, but perhaps it should avoid grouping together upvotes that are "interrupted" by an upvote elsewhere? I'm not sure. – Tim Stone Sep 10 '11 at 1:02

You must log in to answer this question.

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