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

I hit my score cap for the day with a couple of upvotes going unscored, which is what I would expect. However, I then had somebody downvote an answer of mine, which dropped my total score by -2.

Should my upvote "surplus" keep me from losing the two points, or is it (as it seems) strictly chronological? As in, I will have to get another upvote to regain the -2?

Either way, is this a bug or a feature?

UPDATE

It does appear to be running in chronological order. When I perform a manual recalc (as suggest by @ConradFrix), my daily does not change, and even the rescore seems to count scores in the order that they happened. Notice the 6, followed by 0's, and then the -2...instead of the 6 becoming a 10 and the following one becoming 6.

 2   9740571 [6]
 2   9738649 [0]
 2   9742556 [0]
 3   9742816 [-2]
 3   9742816 [-2]
 3   9742816 [-2]
 3   9742816 [-2]
 3   9742816 [-2]

However, I still would like to hear back from a moderator or maybe documentation that denotes this? Otherwise, I am still not sure if this is a bug or purposeful design. If purposeful design, what is the reasoning?

share|improve this question
    
Out of curiosity what happens when you trigger a manual recalc at stackoverflow.com/reputation – Some Helpful Commenter Mar 16 '12 at 18:38
    
I deleted the -2 answer and regained my points. I will see if I can reproduce this...hopefully I dont get hit by tons of downvotes :-p. I will let you know shortly – Justin Pihony Mar 16 '12 at 18:41
    
I just updated my question. This did not work, and only proved the fact...so I am still waiting to hear if this is a bug or on purpose. I personally think it is a bug...but that is me :) – Justin Pihony Mar 16 '12 at 18:54
    
So did you trigger a manual recalc? – Some Helpful Commenter Mar 16 '12 at 18:55
    
Yes, the info is below the UPDATE in my question – Justin Pihony Mar 16 '12 at 18:58
    
@ConradFrix Oy, I will have to double check this tomorrow. When you said trigger...I did not realize you meant the button at the bottom that I totally missed. I had never used that page before. I went to re-verify my test and got yelled at for only one recalc a day – Justin Pihony Mar 16 '12 at 19:29
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Yes, you do need to receive another upvote to "re-reach" the reputation cap for the day. And yes, that's a by-design feature.

As for whether the system should be designed to care about chronology, that's a separate question. I think it's actually been asked here on Meta at some point, but I don't know where at the moment.

share|improve this answer
    
Yah, I tried to find any previous questions, but could not. Normally, I would not re-ask the same question, but you are right, my original question was how. So, I will re-ask with a should :) – Justin Pihony Mar 16 '12 at 19:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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