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.

Possible Duplicates:
Weighted Down-Voting based on Reputation
Encourage users to select ‘Accepted Answer’ for old Questions
Force Accepted Answers on Questions by Inactive Users
Should questions with no accepted answers be charged “interest” after awhile?
Max downvotes per question/answer
Downvotes appear to be pure evil
Upvoting based on celebrity, too many upvotes (“excessive rep slurping”)
Are we too rep-focused?
Vote to delete answers
Reedem reputation for deleted negative answers?

  1. I hate it how I have absolutely zero chance of getting reputation back when someone downvotes me, even when I'm obviously right. People downvote because they are stupid (sorry, but it happens) or because they didn't understand my answer, and after I clarifiy, they are long gone or don't care anymore/enough. People also downvote impulsively or because others downvoted. I think that after one downvote, more downvotes shouldnt be allowed for a certain period of time unless the downvote comes from someone who has more rep than the person before.

  2. I also don't like that there is no guide on posting or strict enforcement of such. If someone poses a question in the "Add another answer" dialogue, then this must clearly be wrong behaviour. Still they get away with it.

    This is clearly a site that puts the wrong focus on the people, instead of the quality of the answers. Someone who has more rep, should count more when up or downvoting, and someone who downvotes very often, has little rep or accepts answers very rarely shouldn't be able to deteriorate my rep.

  3. It should also be punished if someone doesn't accept an answer, or at least make it auto accept the answer which has the most rep.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Shog9, waiwai933, Ladybug Killer, random Jul 26 '10 at 16:59

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.

4  
Wouldn't giving people with higher rep more weight in voting be putting focus on the people instead of the answer? –  Rebecca Chernoff Jul 26 '10 at 16:39
1  
@Blub: yeah, I suspect you should have split this into several posts... #3 is probably a duplicate of meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8692/… and similar to quite a few other suggestions as well. –  Shog9 Jul 26 '10 at 16:47
1  
@Blub, it seems to me that you have a specific example or two in mind; could you please link to them? –  Pops Jul 26 '10 at 16:50
1  
@Blub: You show demonstratively, that you haven't understood the voting system at all. Posts are voted on, not people. Content matters. People suck. –  Ladybug Killer Jul 26 '10 at 16:51
6  
I agree with all of your points besides 1, 2, and 3. –  jjnguy Jul 26 '10 at 16:54
8  
@Blub: So stop being so offended by downvotes and being too proud of your answers. Problem solved. –  XMLbog Jul 26 '10 at 17:00
3  
@Blub: It doesn't work only because you're too proud of the way you're doing things, which you admit is a problem. So be less proud and accept that your way might be wrong, that being proud and offended by trivial things is wrong. The first step toward improvement is recognizing the problem. –  XMLbog Jul 26 '10 at 17:07
3  
@Blub: regarding your first example... I've had to wait months for an accepted answer. I've posted answers that have never been accepted, in spite of comments from the asker that they've been successful in utilizing it. It's an optional action, you can't force it. –  Shog9 Jul 26 '10 at 17:10
3  
@Blub: That is fair. However it doesn't make you right, either. SO has been operating for over a year with only a tiny minority of its users like you complaining about its functionality from a reward/punishment point of view. Scientifically, the theories governing SO are right more often than they're wrong. That is good enough for any community, especially one with community moderation built right into it. Unless, of course, you have evidence that the system isn't actually working as intended on a large scale. I don't think you have such evidence. –  XMLbog Jul 26 '10 at 17:19
1  
@Blub : I think you might benefit from a read of meta.stackexchange.com/questions/44188/… , many of it's concepts are applicable to StackOverflow as well. –  rlb.usa Jul 26 '10 at 17:20
1  
@Blub Regarding your suggestions, the things that you mention are not arbitrary, and they have been planned, talked about, experimented with, discussed, and voted on. You are entitled to your opinion, but please understand that things are the way they are for good reason (and what those reasons are, see earlier links). –  rlb.usa Jul 26 '10 at 17:23
1  
I have a feeling this post had something to do with me receiving yet another downvote on one of my answers from way back that I had a bit of a moan about. Ahh, the joys of meta... :-) I learned here that the worst thing you can do about downvotes is complain! –  Andy E Jul 26 '10 at 17:27
1  
@Blub - if you are responding to a comment, especially made by someone who cast a down vote on your answer, use @user when replying. This alerts them that you have replied to them the next time they load a page. Otherwise, they usually have no idea that you posted any kind of clarification. I think the answer in question is this one (?): stackoverflow.com/questions/3236638/… –  Tim Post Jul 26 '10 at 17:27
6  
I read recently that people don't downvote enough, and when they do the post just gets sympathy upvotes. Huh. Strange world we live in. –  user27414 Jul 26 '10 at 17:37
2  
@Tim: the first three. –  perbert Jul 26 '10 at 18:38
show 10 more comments

2 Answers

up vote 19 down vote accepted

I hate it how I have absolutely zero chance of getting reputation back...

Delete your answer and request a reputation recalc using the "flag for moderator attention." You'll get your rep back.

...even when I'm obviously right.

Must not have been so obvious.

...or because they didn't understand my answer...

If they didn't understand your answer, then it probably belongs in the "not helpful" category, which is what a downvote means. Don't take it personally, just try to clarify your answer as best you can. If your answer is helpful then the next person to read it will upvote it.

I think that after one downvote, more downvotes shouldnt be allowed for a certain period of time unless the downvote comes from someone who has more rep than the person before.

No, we've been over this before. I have a lot of reputation from answering questions about Java, but I know nothing about a lot of other languages. My vote shouldn't count for more than yours over a very wide range of topics.

If someone poses a question in the "Add another answer" dialogue, then this must clearly be wrong behaviour. Still they get away with it.

Please flag these "answers" for moderator attention. I delete a lot of these every day, so they're not really getting away with it.

This is clearly a site that puts the wrong focus on the people, instead of the quality of the answers. Someone who has more rep, should count more when up or downvoting, and someone who downvotes very often, has little rep or accepts answers very rarely shouldn't be able to deteriorate my rep.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. The focus should be on the quality of the content, not the person. If you take overall rep into account, you'd be focusing more on the person casting the votes.

It should also be punished if someone doesn't accept an answer, or at least make it auto accept the answer which has the most rep.

No, that's voluntary. It's a bonus if your answer gets accepted, not a mandatory requirement. If you give the right answer, then you should gain plenty of rep in the form of upvotes and your answer will rise to the top of the page.

share|improve this answer
4  
I admire your commitment, @Bill. –  Ladybug Killer Jul 26 '10 at 16:55
    
@Bill: citation: Please flag these "answers" for moderator attention. I delete a lot of these every day, so they're not really getting away with it. What about punishment? This shouldn't sound cruel, but humans (as I am) generally do not alter their behaviour when they get corrected unless it has consequences. –  Blub Jul 26 '10 at 17:00
    
@Ladybug Killer: Thank you, I appreciate your saying so. –  Bill the Lizard Jul 26 '10 at 17:02
6  
@Blub: There are generally three ways to get people to change their behavior: Education, punishment, and reward. You don't need to try punishment or reward until you give education a try. The vast majority of questions posted as answers are by users with one reputation. They just need to be told how the system works. They get rewarded when they ask a question properly and it actually gets answers. There's usually no need to punish them. –  Bill the Lizard Jul 26 '10 at 17:05
    
@bill: In what way do they get educated when you moderate a question? Well I just had one guy be really condescending to me with a lot more rep than me. I guess I really like stackoverflow, it's just sad to me that I can't get the same kind of reward as I give others when they answer my questions. –  Blub Jul 26 '10 at 17:19
    
@Blub: If it's a brand new user, I leave a comment telling them they should ask a separate question and point them to the [Ask Question] button. One thing you can try is to check a user's accept rate before you answer their question. (It's posted below their reputation and badges in the question body.) If they have a really low accept-rate, you're less likely to get an upvote or an accepted answer from them. –  Bill the Lizard Jul 26 '10 at 17:32
add comment

I'll try to hit all the salient points of your rant:

  • Most of your criticisms are mitigated by the fact that an upvote is 5 times the weight of a downvote with respect to Rep earned, so in the long run downvotes mean very little.

  • With respect to this statement you made:

    This is clearly a site that puts the wrong focus on the people, instead of the quality of the answers.

    Who is there to determine the quality, if not the people? The people are needed to help separate the wheat from the chaff via their votes. Arguably, downvotes probably aren't used enough in this regard.

    It has been said many times that Rep is not necessarily a measure of skill, simply a measure of ones involvement in the site. So, weighting votes by Rep is pointless, since higher Rep users are not necessarily experts.

  • An accepted answer is also only 1.5 times the weight of an upvote, so if people don't accept an answer you're not losing much Rep relative to the upvotes you likely got for the answer. Also, the votes from the community are enough to show which answer is best.

share|improve this answer
    
Ok, you answered a single thing of my 10 billion criticism post. Hope to hear more. –  Blub Jul 26 '10 at 16:43
    
I would say that all 4 of his bullet points directly relate to your question. –  Neil N Jul 26 '10 at 16:53
    
@Neil N: I've been editing in more points as I go. He had a lot of them. ;) –  gnostradamus Jul 26 '10 at 16:54
add comment

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