Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 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

I just went to make a bounty on a question I previously bountied and found that the minimum rep is now 100.

Please fix this back, so we can put up 50 rep bounties again. While I've put up larger bounties before, not all questions need that level.

Do you really think we weren't attracting enough attention with the 50 rep bounties?

EDIT: This is now a feature-request to remove the sad feature that Rebecca references that was just implemented, whereby when you bounty a question that you already bountied, it costs you double.

This will only squelch the main way that the community has to lobby for their feature-request/change.

While the main need to remove this is on Meta, there doesn't seem to be a good reason to implement this on SO either. The only way to abuse the 50 rep bounties, is to give a really good answer. So since the goal of the site is really good answers, is it really abuse?

share|improve this question
Note, that this wasn't documented in the Recent Changes question. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:00
Wait a minute, I can see 50 rep as a bounty option. Are you trying to offer a second bounty on the same question? – Chris Frederick Sep 16 '11 at 6:03
I know I need to go through the RFC2SE and make sure it is's definitely on my list of things to do. – Rebecca Chernoff Sep 16 '11 at 6:04
@Rebecca, I understand busy to-do lists. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:12
@Rebecca I added this one for you. Busy month! :) – Chris Frederick Sep 16 '11 at 6:14
sorry ... this was abused horribly ... we will not be eliminating this feature. – waffles Sep 16 '11 at 6:20
Hmmm, Guess not enough people care about their feature-requests to think that re-bounties matter. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:21
@waffles, no, I don't really think it was abused horribly. If someone paid 50 rep to get a question featured, and they happened to make a little rep off of it (which was seldom my case), then they deserve it for having a good answer that people would upvote. There is no way to really abuse it. It's even less profitable now that questions only get +5 on upvotes. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:22
@lance this is based on SO abuse of bounties exclusively, we honestly did not consider meta at all in this decision – Jeff Atwood Sep 16 '11 at 6:25
@Jeff, well, I've made my point in the comments to waffles and Marc about the term abuse. I certainly have all the Meta rep I need to afford this, but the newer guys coming on will find this to be limiting on their ability to work their feature requests. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:29
@Lance If your question is specific to Meta SO, would you mind updating the title to make that clear? – Chris Frederick Sep 16 '11 at 6:32
@Chris, I might, or add the Meta tag. I'm gonna think on it abit. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:33
up vote 11 down vote accepted

A 50 rep bounty is still possible. However, if you later put another bounty on the same question, you need to pony up more reputation, doubling each time until the max allowed.

You can read more details about this here.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for the answer, sorry SE felt that this was necessary. It will really hamper getting the word out, but I guess the Team is getting tired of people wanting the same things all the time. I certainly wasn't making a profit on my bounties. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:06
@Lance - to clarify, this change was not specifically targeted at meta, and does not relate to any opinion about change-requests on meta. It was primarily to avoid abuse on the main (q&a) sites. It doesn't seem unreasonable to keep the logic the same in both main and meta. – Marc Gravell Sep 16 '11 at 6:22
OK, but I don't see the logic calling it abuse, when someone draw attention to what must be a good answer, or they wouldn't get the upvotes to balance out their expenditure. So the only way they can possibly abuse it would be to give incredibly good answers. – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:27
@Lance ... attention is a limited resource ... taking too much of it is abuse – waffles Sep 16 '11 at 6:28
@waffles, I definitely agree with you that attention is a limited resource, even if I don't think this was the right solution. Couldn't we just have figured out an average of what those abusive bountiers are making, and then make that the maximum instead of the huge progression? – Lance Roberts Sep 16 '11 at 6:30

You must log in to answer this question.

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