What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 127 Stack Exchange communities.

Today, I got the Yearling badge.

I don't remember how my account was created, but I didn't use it for anything until February 2013 when I started being an active user. While I'm not happy with this achievement (because I think that that being logged in for searching answers, and suddenly decide to contribute and gain +200 in a few days should not qualify as "Yearling" beahavior), it seems that the rules for granting Yearling are by-design (see: I got Yearling badge in 273 days, Yearling badge too early, Details on how the Yearling badge works).

In short: I was not active for a year, yet I'm yearling, and that seems to be by-design.

Therefore, the description of Yearling is misleading:

Active member for a year, earning at least 200 reputation

It should read:

Member for a year, earning at least 200 reputation

Or

Active member in a year, earning at least 200 reputation

share|improve this question
    
You were active in the year. –  Martijn Pieters Mar 28 '13 at 15:10
2  
It all depends on how you define "active". Active != visited necessarily –  Hugo Dozois Mar 28 '13 at 15:11
    
Well, i used to think that 200 reputation overall is enough for earning Yearling badges every year, but i never knew that i must gain 200 new rep every year to get that badge again. –  shasi Feb 25 at 6:27
add comment

1 Answer

I believe the term "active" is being clarified with the second part of the "sentence".

It is stating that you are considered an active member if, within the last year, you have been a member of the site who earned at least 200 reputation. That's all.

share|improve this answer
    
As a programmer, I understand that sentence as active && rep>=200 (the downvote is not mine) –  Javier Mar 28 '13 at 15:12
3  
As a programmer who deals with NLP on a daily basis, there are many subtleties and complexities to language, including interpretation. –  nickb Mar 28 '13 at 15:14
    
Granted, but shouldn't a description be unambiguous? –  Javier Mar 28 '13 at 15:27
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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