What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 133 Stack Exchange communities.

I came back from a vacation recently and it suddenly seems like I am the only one doing any voting on a certain "average use"* tag all week long.

Prior to the vacation I am ashamed to say I hardly did any voting. But the votes were getting tossed off very regularly both ways without me.

All the same people who were asking and answering before seem to still be here. The number of questions and answers hasn't really changed.

So last week I recognized this voting scarcity and had the vague idea that I could apply economics theory to this.

The dim idea was to remove the scarcity with an influx of votes. I ended up dishing out around 90 votes (real votes, on stuff I thought was good) for this tag, I would say roughly 25% of the questions and answers for this tag in the last week I voted on (some down votes also). Of course, my votes were roughly 75% of all voting on this tag. (I can only give rough data until a newer data dump is done.)

My hypothesis about voting economics hasn't really panned out for me though, I don't know if it is because:

  1. My attempt was too feeble
  2. It cannot really be applied this way
  3. I really have no idea about economics whatsoever anyway

Is there a better way to get people to vote the way they used to on a certain tag?

*"Average" as in bell-curve average (based on Greg Hewlitt's great tag trend grapher). Really, I was referring to more of a tag family (, , ). Around 100 - 200 questions a week.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I don't know that the idea of scarcity necessarily applies here. Scarcity would imply that there are a limited number of votes that are available to the community, so the demand for votes goes up as the number of votes available (supply) goes down. That's a capitalistic way of looking at it...

B͘͏̵͙͎̮U̘͙͢T̵͉̲̘̖̳̪ ̩͖͙̭̩̺̲̬͝T͘ͅḨ̗̫̠̫É̶̠̪̜͈͢ ̨̗͉̗̖S̪̤̭̼̯̀͞T̤̜̗̤̯̜͓͈͈A͉̮͙̯C͍̞͎K̵̨̛̰̩̖ ͏͉̩͈͓̖͢E̦̟͕̞̕X̷̡̹̬̘̥͔̫ͅC͏̖̗̼̻̟͓H͏̥̜̕A̲͖̙̠Ņ̹̫̬͙̭͉̪̝G̶̫̣̰̩̤͖͓̦͓͞E̗̼̦̯ ̯̭̠̠͉̗̕͠S̶҉̵̪̰̩̱͎̖͚Y̵̡͎̥̺̦̼̹͝ͅS͟҉̞͓T͍̩̺͔E̢̺͉̖͓̗̥̟͍̩M͏̗̫ ̶҉̻̰͘Ì̫͍̬͙͞S̴̛̪͚̻̠̳͇ ̦̺̪͔̦̲̘͍̯̕͠͠L̟̺̻͘I̴̬̖͇̹̩̼̦̜͠K̭̙͕̣̻̞E̸͎̹͇̤̮̥͠ͅ ̤̻̬͔̣́ͅͅC̣̝͘͞O̫̞͇̣̹̭ͅM̢͔̦̭̠͝M̶̲̦̻͈̳̞̺͚̀U̶͈͙͎̯͠ͅN̦̲̥̟̪͇I̦̬̝̝̼̕ͅͅS̡̬̗͇͙̭̫͓̰M̘͘

You see,
In this system, everyone gets 30 votes (or 40, if the government approves of your voting habits for that day). There's no scarcity because 95% of the people have all the votes they'll ever need. Then we all live peacefully under the rule of the proletariat, which is really just a facade for the cr̸u̴èl ҉t͞oţa̸l̶itar͠ians ̡t́h̷at͝ ͏ĺuŗk̛ be͠h̢in͟d͡ ̶t̀h̴e͝ ͝c͏urt͏ai̸n͜s͢.

Seriously though, I wouldn't stop what you're doing, because at the very least it makes it seem like multiple people are starting to vote again, and may encourage others to do the same.

share|improve this answer
    
That makes sense, I am beginning to think there was only 1 or 2 benefactors earlier and everyone else has always been as stingy as I used to be. Will need the new data dump to find out. –  Geronimo Jul 27 '12 at 2:20
    
I didn't want to sound dumb and ask, but I still am trying to figure out those characters. How do you do that? –  Geronimo Jul 27 '12 at 23:24
    
Check out eeemo.net. Fair Warning: the Google search for this meme (named Zalgo) may be NSFW. This linked site, however, is safe. –  gobernador Jul 28 '12 at 4:59

Your votes are yours to spend. Spend them how you like. Use economic theory or whatever other criteria you want to determine whether a post was useful (or not) to you.

Except for spending too many votes on any one person. That looks like cheating (or revenge) and will get automatically reversed.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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