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 had an answer with 8 votes that I'm very pleased with, and cleaned it up a bit today. (Basically, I removed the conversational nature it took due to comments plus a bit of formatting and grammar tweaking.)

It went above the Community Wiki threshold, which I knew would happen but did not care as I've enough reputation for my ego and there aren't likely to be many more votes on it in the future.

What was a surprise is that all the reputation-gaining votes were removed from the tag-based statistics. I understand why community wiki posts are not included in these tallies, but I think that any reputation gained in a pre-CW answer should count towards the tag-stats and specialist badge. 8 votes is 2% of the reputation for a specialist badge.

It's like someone took my pony away for being a good little SOpedian and keeping my answers clean-n-tidy! Not fair. Call the whambulance.

So, I think that all votes on answers that earn reputation should count towards the tag stats & specialist total. I understand and support the logic as to why CW answers don't count, because of the insane vote counts they tend to bring. My thinking is that these problem questions/answers go CW wiki quickly.

Also, as I understand it, part of the reason Stack Overflow has all these badges and reputation and other sparkly stuff is to encourage desirable behavior in the user base—like editing answers to make them better. The current situation on this point discourages desirable behavior. I, for one, will not be tweaking or updating my answers in the future if they will cross the CW threshold. A specialist badge is more important to me than fine tuning or updating my answers.

An alternative would be to count votes to answers of non-CW questions, regardless of the CW state of the answer. Not so sure about that idea, though.

share|improve this question
    
See also stackoverflow.com/questions/1598759/… as a classic example of such a policy. Jakub's comment: "Hrmph. Due to SO policy this post was made Community Wiki after sixth edit by the original owner (me). While I can understand this policy, this means that if I want to get reputation, I should not create answer incrementally" –  VonC Jun 22 '10 at 16:39
    
@VonC: Kinda different. I'm not really questioning the future reputation gain not achieved, but rather that I am loosing votes previously earned toward specialist badge. –  Stu Thompson Jun 22 '10 at 17:22
    
true. But if this (his answer turned Wiki) cost him some points in the 'git' tag (he had before the answer turned CW), that would be a shame (considering he is an actual Git committer -- on the gitweb part -- ). –  VonC Jun 22 '10 at 19:29

3 Answers 3

I was on the fence, but after seeing your post I agree with your request. You obviously put some time into that post, and you should be rewarded for your knowledge and work. I can understand not tallying votes for posts to a CW question as that could essentially invalidate the specialist badge idea. That being said, I think that any post that doesn't start off as a CW post should be considered legitimate up until that time. If there wasn't a threshold where a post changed to CW I would think differently, but I do feel that it is kinda unfair that a person loses counts towards a specialist badge for trying to improve the answer.

I think it would be nice if there was a save as draft feature for writing/editing posts as there are times I save an edit to the post to make sure I don't lose after 20 minutes of writing. I am sure that I am not the only one who has spent 20 minutes working on a post only to find out that the browser decides it's time for a smoke break and closes down forcing me to re-write the whole post over again.

share|improve this answer

Your concern is valid but we certainly don't want to see a million gold badges awarded to people just for posting an xkcd comic.

To quote Jeff:

I was originally going to include community wiki answers in the calculations, as badges have historically ignored that designation. I changed my mind, however, when I saw the huge number of silver and gold “subjective”, “fun”, “off-topic”, etc etc badges this would create. :)

It's theoretically possible to count votes that are cast before the answer is made CW, however, it's likely to increase the complexity of the system.

I think your proposal (using CW status of the question) is a nice idea.

share|improve this answer

This is really a request for the community wiki author-only edits forcing behavior to change.

That is potentially possible (I've already loosened the threshold recently), but as stated, I don't agree with this request.

share|improve this answer
4  
That's not really true, is it? He is asking for the tag statistics to adhere to the same principle as does reputation: Pre-CW votes count; Post-CW votes don't count. That's a totally different thing from what you link to. –  Pëkka Jun 22 '10 at 9:10
1  
Like @Down says: The question is about the loss of non-CW votes contributing towards a specialist badge. Also, my question explicitly states my acceptance of the CC wiki threshold. Not the same as your link. –  Stu Thompson Jun 22 '10 at 12:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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