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

Possible Duplicate:
Delaying comments/up votes/down votes after a question/answer is posted

Down-votes are a way of feedback, but should not be the primary way of feedback.

Would it be good to disallow down-voting for a short period of time, while OP is reviewing the comments and correcting his malformed question?

Say 5 or 10 minutes after the original post was made.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Arjan, Yannis, a cat, casperOne Apr 20 '12 at 18:00

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.

Votes (up/down) are the primary way of feedback. Deal with it. – Yannis Apr 20 '12 at 17:56
I didn't downvote, but why shouldn't the OP take care of not wasting the reader's time to start with? – Arjan Apr 20 '12 at 17:57
I have to offset all my good karma somehow... – stslavik Apr 20 '12 at 17:59
In case you didn't know: Voting is different on Meta – Dennis Apr 20 '12 at 18:00
Downvotes are different on meta and, commenting is not required for downvotes. If you get one, consider yourself lucky, as voting is intended to be anonymous. – casperOne Apr 20 '12 at 18:00
When a question has been edited, it is possible to change your vote (for example from down- to up-vote). Maybe after an edit users could get notifications like: "Question ... was edited after you down-voted it. Care to have a look at it again?" ? – Stephen Apr 20 '12 at 18:00
Problem: Downvoted questions. Solution: Don't ask crappy questions. – Won't Apr 20 '12 at 18:34
up vote 13 down vote accepted

I don't think this is a good idea: it encourages users to post malformed questions. Consider that while OPs are reforming their question and responding to comments, many repliers are busy writing responses, which then have to be altered to account for the amended question.

share|improve this answer

I don't think this would be a good idea.

Voting is used to set apart the good questions from the bad ones.

The immense number of questions posted every minute to Stack Overflow would make it almost impossible to actually downvote bad questions, defeating to purpose of voting in the process.

This would also discourage putting enough effort in the question in the first place. A malformed question that gets radically edited is a waste of everybody's time.

Furthermore, if the OP corrects his question, all votes can reverse their vote (if they choose so).

share|improve this answer

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