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

Is there a rule or guideline for a good relation between the answer to question ratio?

I mean to be a reasonable SO-user and be accepted by others. Should good SO-users give (answer) more than take (ask)? Or is it nowadays the other way around: I should take more than give?

Is there a guideline for the ratio of upvotes to downvotes? Is occasional downvotes, but not too many, expected of a good member of the community?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by gnat, Lance Roberts discussion May 15 '14 at 18:27

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

Here you have the ultimate guide on what to do

% of your time doing
14.50% - asking questions
47.11% - answering questions
04.03% - writing snarky comments
07.21% - writing useful comments
10.00% - editing badly written answers/questions
02.54% - rolling back badly edited questions
02.02% - Voting to close/reopen questions
12.59% - Hitting reload on the active questions page

% of your votes
50% - Upvotes on good answers
25% - Upvotes on good questions
15% - Downvotes on bad answers
07% - Downvotes on bad questions
03% - Upvotes on my answers

share|improve this answer
No good, my vote ratio is bust! I currently have 0% votes on your answers! – Grace Note Jun 3 '10 at 11:40
+1 for the 12.59 – Amarghosh Jun 3 '10 at 12:35
Wow, I'm going to have to catch up on my 3%. Thanks for the heads up! – Pëkka Jun 3 '10 at 15:30

A mistake that you are making is categorizing asking good questions as taking. In fact, by asking a good question, you are helping to ensure that the next person that hits your problem is going to find a good answer in their first search. That is, of course, if your question is titled appropriately and can be answered. If there were no questions, there would be no answers.

Really, anything you do on the site is giving. Even down-voting a bad question or answer is giving, since it will lower the signal to noise ratio for the next person that has a similar problem and finds answers on SO.

To me, taking would mean using the site and enjoying the benefits without contributing any time at all asking / answering / voting on questions. Somewhere on Meta (I can't find it now) was a discussion regarding the amount of page views SO gets compared to the number of active users. IIRC, most people who visit SO become users and contribute some time to improve the site, by doing one or all of the above activities.

share|improve this answer

Questions vs Answers

No, no ratio. Both are needed, and some people are better at one than the other. (I suck at asking, for example.)


It has been proposed that as many half as many upvotes than downvotes is undesirable (e.g. 800 upvotes and 1,600 downvotes). I don't agree with this myself, and I currently, on SO, vote down about twice as much as up (however, my early voting trend was the opposite, so downvotes are only now about at a 1:1 total ratio). I attribute this to the limit on votes per day more than any other single factor.

share|improve this answer

I think one shouldn't care about the questions vs. answers rate. I'd much rather have people asking only questions - but good ones - than people feeling compelled to give back, even though they may not be able to provide quality input yet.

As to voting... Hardly any of your peers will care about your voting ratio, except in extreme cases where downvoting outweighs upvoting massively. In those cases, your voting privileges may get limited.

The problem with this is that heavy downvoting can have two reasons: 1. you scrutinize the content provided on SO, and downvote where it fails your high professional standards; or 2. you are an asshole. The same goes for upvoting: One can be either very engaged and simply giving a lot of positive feedback, or a mindless nice guy upvoting out of sympathy rather than based on sound judgement of the answers provided.

Which is which is hard to tell, which is why I'd say this is down to your own judgement. I myself, for example, with a ratio of 3800 upvotes to 225 downvotes, feel I could do some more downvoting... but it's not really important.

share|improve this answer

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