What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 122 Stack Exchange communities.

Possible Duplicate:
Cannot retract downvote if post has been edited within first 5 minutes of posting

I recently voted on an answer that had just been posted, but then (during the 5 minute invisible edit grace period) it was edited in a way that caused me to want to retract my vote. However, I get this message:

Your vote is now locked in unless this answer is edited

Shouldn't these hidden edits unlock votes in the same way that visible edits do?


To reproduce (I guess you'll need two users):

In the first five minutes:

  • User A posts a once sentence answer
  • User B votes on the answer
  • User A edits the answer (since this edit is in the first five minutes, there isn't any edit history)

There is now an answer that doesn't say it has been edited, that user B has voted on. All is well, until:

  • After some time (say 7 minutes after User B voted), User B sees the edited answer, and wants to change or retract their vote. But when they try to do so:
  • The system rejects the vote change because the answer "has not been edited"

This bug has been reported before (and closed as completed), but the workaround only works if User B notices the edit in the first five minutes. Additionally, the workaround causes the error message to be incorrect.

Expected: Ideally the vote change succeeds, because the answer has been edited. Or, less desirably, the error message instead reads "your vote is now locked because you voted 5 minutes ago"

Actual: Vote fails with the incorrect error message "Vote is now locked in unless this answer is edited".

share|improve this question
    
Doesn't the linked post only include a workaround rather than a fix? The bug still exists if I don't notice for 6 minutes –  Timothy Jones Feb 16 '12 at 0:33
5  
New bugs really shouldn't be closed as duplicates of other status-completed bugs; it doesn't make sense. In this case because Jeff's "fix" doesn't actually fix this case –  Michael Mrozek Feb 16 '12 at 1:37
1  
I've reopened the question. It took me a bit to figure out what you meant, though. Can you edit to clarify what behaviour you're seeing and what you expected to see instead? (E.g. did you wait longer than the 5-minute retraction grace period before attempting to remove your vote?) Thanks. –  Anna Lear Feb 23 '12 at 5:10
1  
A step-by-step process to repeat the problem would be ideal. –  Adam Davis Feb 23 '12 at 5:13
    
@AnnaLear: Sorry it wasn't clear before - I've added a longer description of the problem. –  Timothy Jones Feb 23 '12 at 23:31
    
@NickCraver So it is. Sorry I didn't find that in my search before posting :) I like this answer –  Timothy Jones Feb 23 '12 at 23:34
add comment

marked as duplicate by Nick Craver Feb 24 '12 at 1:01

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.

1 Answer

up vote 0 down vote accepted

I see now that this has been reported before, and closed as by-design. It seems silly to have an incorrect error message by design.

However, it also sounds like the hidden edits in the grace period aren't tracked in the database, meaning a fix instead of a workaround could be complex.

With that in mind, I thought this solution was pretty elegant (paraphrased a little):

Perhaps the easy solution is to change hidden edits to edits within the first five minutes on posts with no votes.

share|improve this answer
add comment

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