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

I just now added a question to my favorites and just as I clicked the star a small orange box showed up saying an error has occurred and I should click again. Then I realized that it had incremented the favorite counter to 666.

Has anyone else experienced this or has someone access to check what happened? Maybe there is some hidden feature behind 666 favorites? :)

UPDATE: At least I think 666 could have given an opportunity for something planned to happen.

share|improve this question
That was funny SO! – Shoe Jan 18 '11 at 10:08
status-coincidence – Pëkka Jan 18 '11 at 11:01

I often get ajax errors, I don't think there's anything special about that number. I don't think the team added a special error (it isn't even a power of 2), nor do I believe a demon or another fantastic creature interfered with your communication at that point, awaken by its number.

Don't feel bad though; It is human to see patterns where there aren't any.

share|improve this answer
It almost sounds like you accept getting errors ;) I haven't experienced any other errors here in SO and this one was too much of a coincidence due to 666. In any case maybe someone is interested to have a look what caused the error and correct things. – murrekatt Jan 18 '11 at 8:04
I don't know - if I had to impose an arbitrary limit on something then I'd probably choose a nice round number. At least it would be easy to spot - just search the codebase for 666! :) – Justin Jan 18 '11 at 8:16
@murrekatt: Errors are inevitable, even if your part of the system is perfect. In this age of WiFi and 3G, a failed AJAX call could mean "no route to host" - it's sometimes easier to leave the decision to retry up to the user. – Piskvor Jan 18 '11 at 10:35
@Piskvor: sure. I was not referring to that. – murrekatt Jan 18 '11 at 11:59
so what you're saying is that this is a particularly clever new kind of CAPTCHA? – Pops Jan 18 '11 at 14:38

You must log in to answer this question.

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