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

Is it good or bad for StackExchange if a user chooses to make most or all of the content he/she contributes to StackExchange become community wiki content? There are several hypothetical motivations for this course of action.

For example, wanting to avoid gaining reputation to avoid become full of him/herself, since that person might think that becoming full of him/herself would hinder his/her motivation to study hard.

Other than that, making large amounts of community wiki content might be considered 'altruistic' or 'generous' since some people might perceive that their unselfishness of not wanting reputation would somehow help StackExchange become a better site.

share|improve this question
Then why have an account? Just post anonymously. – Al E. Dec 19 '12 at 18:27
What could be bad about points? – woz Dec 19 '12 at 18:27
If SO points make you arrogant and think you're mart, you need to change your worldview. :) Either way, don't make posts Community Wiki for this reason - it's not what it was built for. Post anonymously instead, or ask moderators to dissociate the content from your account. – Pëkka Dec 19 '12 at 18:31
It's not possible for you to make questions community wiki, so no! It's not fine! ;) – Jeremy Banks Dec 19 '12 at 18:32
Yeah I understand that points are an integral part of SO and SE. Thanks lol – user194867 Dec 19 '12 at 18:38
I don't want to become arrogant and think that I'm so smart when I have lots of points Given that you posted that comment, my guess is you're already there and avoiding getting points isn't going to help. – Servy Dec 19 '12 at 18:41
+1 ... Oh, wait. – Robert Harvey Dec 19 '12 at 18:46
So are the +1s for spite, or does this really seem like a good question to you guys? – Servy Dec 19 '12 at 18:48
I think the "is this appropriate behavior?" question is good, but I don't think much of the motivation for the question. (I haven't voted either way.) – Monica Cellio Dec 19 '12 at 18:51
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Once you earn enough reputation points, you can give them away using bounties. For example, if you come across an answer that you want to reward, award it a bounty of 500 points. This way, you can influence the community, without accumulating points yourself.

Alternatively, if you're feeling spiteful, you could spend your points downvoting answers you dislike:

Someone is WRONG on the internet!

Nothing's wrong with marking your answers as CW. However, if you make your questions CW, that would discourage those people that are concerned about reputation from answering.

If you use CW to avoid gaining reputation, be aware of the side-effect (from your perspective) that more people will be able to edit your post without having to go through the suggested edits queue. CW is an invitation to collaborate: its purpose is to tell others that you want others to substantively revise or add to your post, making a collaborative answer.

share|improve this answer
Nothing's wrong with marking your answers as CW. That's not true. There are some problems associated with making an answer CW that conceptually shouldn't be CW. – Servy Dec 19 '12 at 18:35
Alternatively, if you're feeling spiteful, you could spend your points downvoting answers you dislike: You're limited to 40 votes per day, so unless you average 4 or less upvotes per day, that's not an option. Also beware the serial voting reversal script. – Servy Dec 19 '12 at 18:36
@servy "...problems...": interesting - can you explain? – AndrewC Dec 19 '12 at 19:06
@AndrewC You reduce the rep requirement for editing without review, you imply that others should be editing the post for content, rather than just for grammar/formatting (even if you don't think that others should be editing it for content) you imply to the OP and other readers that it's the work of a conglomerate of people, even though it's not, etc. The lack of rep gain is a side effect of being CW, not the primary purpose. – Servy Dec 19 '12 at 19:19
@Servy Superb answer, thanks. – AndrewC Dec 19 '12 at 22:04
Related: The Future Of Community Wiki – Tim Post Dec 20 '12 at 3:59
@Servy: Good point. Edited to make it clearer about the intent of CW. – Mechanical snail Dec 22 '12 at 22:15

You must log in to answer this question.