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

Anyone else feel that there is random down voting?

A recent example: How to use transactions with the Entity Framework?

Almost 2 year old answer, accepted, 10 upvotes, then a down vote.

share|improve this question
All day, everyday, all the time. Don't be shy. – random Jun 8 '11 at 17:07
We probably get random up votes as well, but no complaints for that. – Bo Persson Jun 8 '11 at 17:18
Ooh...drat...I'm 4 rep short of being able to randomly down vote this question...not that I tried...well, ok, maybe I did – Gerrat Jun 8 '11 at 20:25
It's not really in the spirit of stackexchange to vote down this question just to have your ROFLOL. – Roalt Jun 8 '11 at 20:41
up vote 6 down vote accepted

The thing that makes Stack Overflow (and, really, all web resources) so useful is the persistence of data. Thus, no matter how long it has been since a particular question was asked, if someone runs into a similar problem, they may find it.

According to the timeline, there was an upvote to another answer, a comment on that answer, and a downvote on your answer all in one recent day. The comment/upvote combo indicates that someone basically had that problem and found that answer helpful. In fact, Kim's answer has been receiving upvotes for a while, so that question is getting a fair amount of viewing activity in spite of its age.

The downvote is not necessarily related to that user - it could've been anyone who found your answer dissatisfactory. Point is, no matter the age, people browse and run into these things. And apparently someone did not find your answer useful. It can be considered "random" in the sense that you didn't see it coming, but it's not all that unexpected in the system as a whole.

share|improve this answer

Perhaps someone who agrees with Miguel Vitorino's comment:

Be careful with TransactionScope. It introduces dependencies on MS DTC which is a pain to configure and carries a hefty performance price. Once you have more than one transaction inside the TransactionScope it will initiate a distributed transaction. It will no longer be just a plain DbTransaction running on the used provider. Also, if you are using a database provider other than Sql Server it is likely it won't support distributed transactions...

Otherwise I wouldn't sweat a single (or even 2) downvote, it happens.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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