What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 129 Stack Exchange communities.

At present it looks like the sportsmanship badge is only awarded once (at least I assume this because it doesn't explicitly say it's awarded multiple times on the badge page.) Would it make sense to change this so it's awarded multiple times, so it works for every 100 competing answers upvoted?

I doubt this feature would be abused since it involves essentially putting your answers at a disadvantage, and it'd still encourage people to keep on fairly upvoting competing answers even after they've already upvoted 100.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

I doubt this feature would be abused since it involves essentially putting your answers at a disadvantage

Well yes, only if you had an answer in the first place. I could just as well put junk answers onto 30 questions and vote up the proper answers, you know. Every 10 days, bam - 3 silver medals. The possibilities are mind boggling! I can get more silvers than Jon Skeet! (unless his highness does the same...)

EDIT

It was a mission* but I found the info I was looking for. I guess this Jon Skeet fact is true

  • Jon Skeet has more "Nice Answer" badges than you have badges.

Jon can generate badges faster than you can farm the badge change you propose. That's something.

(*Please can people upvote this: Show earned badges summary in the user profile?)

share|improve this answer
4  
Posting junk answers would result in a lot of downvoting. I think people care too much about rep (even more than about badges!) to let that happen to themselves. –  John Mar 13 '11 at 18:31
1  
@john - you came in the wrong way. What's more true is that if you posted a so-so answer (even one that is copied), people are more likely to ignore your answer without downvoting for exactly that reason - to protect their precious rep. You may even get one or to upvotes. –  RichardTheKiwi Mar 13 '11 at 19:12
    
True, but that's a so-so answer. You were talking about junk answers. To me, there is a difference. :-) –  John Mar 13 '11 at 19:14
1  
@richard true! people won't usually downvote unless they really think its bad, but upvotes are free and people do that more often. –  gideon Apr 2 '11 at 11:12
4  
You know that your answer has to have at least one upvote for it to qualify, right? It'd be pretty hard to game without actually posting useful content and then you're not really gaming it as much as you are being forced to post useful content. –  Daniel DiPaolo Apr 2 '11 at 14:28
    
@Daniel / Good point, I never read the fine print. I just rarely put answers that get no votes :) so I don't notice. But it's still easy to copy/paste (mod a bit) in the early life of a question and get a couple of votes. –  RichardTheKiwi Apr 2 '11 at 21:52

You must log in to answer this question.

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