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.

I've looked through a number of the "Vote too old to be changed" questions, but I think this one's different.

I gave a downvote to an answer I thought had a critical defect, and I left a comment describing the defect. The answer was edited to satisfy my criticism, but it was done within the short grace period where edits aren't recorded as such. When I try to cancel my downvote I get the error - "Your vote is now locked in unless this answer is edited" - but it was edited!

In reference to this answer: how to generate different random number in a loop in C++?

share|improve this question
2  
Hmm, what a delightful edge case –  Earlz Feb 7 '11 at 23:44
add comment

2 Answers

Just edit the answer yourself, then roll it back...

share|improve this answer
    
That doesn't eliminate the bug, it's just a work-around. Very sneaky though, if it works. –  Mark Ransom Feb 8 '11 at 2:47
    
@Mark It works. I've done it several times for this same problem. –  RichardTheKiwi Feb 8 '11 at 2:54
    
For now I'm going to leave it just in case the SO crew wants to have a look at the current status. –  Mark Ransom Feb 8 '11 at 3:13
    
@Mark no argument with that. Just presenting the current workaround –  RichardTheKiwi Feb 8 '11 at 3:16
add comment

This is by design -- edits in the 5 minute grace period are treated as if the post always existed that way.

share|improve this answer
5  
I know the 5 minute grace period is by design, and I've taken advantage of it many times; thank you. But can I assume the bug is not by design? If you were to classify it as not worth fixing I'd understand. –  Mark Ransom Feb 8 '11 at 14:37
    
@mark it's not a bug, it's by design. I recommend not voting on anything only a few minutes old as it might change underneath you. –  Jeff Atwood Feb 8 '11 at 15:55
4  
that's an unwanted side effect of the way the grace period is implemented. there's no way the vote locking was designed that way. both answers propose a workaround for the problem (yours in your comment). if you guys don't want to fix it, fine. but calling it "this is by design" is pure bullshit :) –  Karoly Horvath Sep 1 '13 at 22:10
1  
I know you're not around any more to see this, but I had a thought I wanted to record. Your advice is impractical because I want to vote as early as possible, so it will influence others considering the answer in its current form. –  Mark Ransom Sep 18 '13 at 18:18
    
If this is by design than the design is buggy. –  jwg Jun 13 at 13:58
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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