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

Recently I downvoted the answer because I thought it didn't answer the question. Not very uncommon reason to downvote, isn't it? But then the guy, who asked the question, edited his question and I realized that the answer I downvoted actually answers it and deserves an upvote instead! But I couldn't do it.

I could do it if the answerer had edited his post. As I understand, the rationale of changing vote after edit is the following. If I came to the question page for the first time after the edit of the answer, I would've upvoted it instead of downvoting.

But why doesn't the same rationale hold for the cases when the question is edited? Unless there's a good reason, I suggest to allow changing answer vote on question edits, not only on answer ones.

share|improve this question
We should be able to change our votes no matter what. It shouldn't require anything to be edited or changed. – endolith Jul 31 '11 at 21:15
+1 to @endolith comment. It's our vote, we should be able to change it. At least during the first minutes... – TheBronx May 9 '13 at 11:15
I came here to post this same request. Many times the OP adds clarification that makes previously incorrect answers correct, or vice versa. I suppose another "solution" is to ask users to wait until all clarifications are addressed before casting votes, but that's not very realistic, and sometimes not even possible. – Jason C Aug 14 '13 at 14:35

+1 for this request. As an interim, assuming you don't have enough rep to edit, you can comment on the answer you DV'ed, explaining that you'd like to reverse your vote, and request that the answerer edit his post in a minor way so you can. I don't like this solution, though -- I much prefer your feature request.

If you have enough rep to edit, go with RSolberg's answer.

share|improve this answer

I'd also like to support this request and point out that it's a silly restriction anyways, as anybody with >= 2k rep can change their vote whenever they want simply by trivially editing the answer they want to change their vote on (e.g. shuffling some whitespace around).

At the bare minimum, just make it so anybody with >= 2k rep can change their votes at any time - if you're going to allow this anyways you might as well reduce arbitrary edits by just letting votes change.

Since there's an easy way around the voting thing, either figure out a way to prevent the workaround, or just drop the rule. Anyways I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind preventing vote changes in the first place. Perhaps stopping vote changes a few weeks after a vote is cast is more aligned with whatever the goal is there.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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