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.

It has happened to me a few times. I've read through a question and answer, misunderstood some key point and accidentally voted the wrong way. Then a minute later I realize what I have done and try and undo my vote only to have it be locked on me. Surely I can't be the only one who has experienced this?

Sure you could argue that I need to read more carefully before I vote, but I think anyone is capable of making the occasional mistake. You can also kind of work around this issue by doing a quick edit to the question or answer that has a locked vote and then correct the vote, that is less then ideal though.

I've also experienced the occasional technical hiccup where my vote is marked on the client but when refreshed is not marked on the server. Attempted to re-vote to correct the state is met with the locked message, which is annoying to say the least.

My suggestion is to remove the vote lock or alternatively, increase the grace period to something more reasonable. While I understand that is an attempt to prevent tactical downvoting, I think the solution could use improvement. How about your votes only get locked on a per question basic if you have a "competing" answer?

Basically, I understand the need to prevent gaming, but this is one of those anti-gaming countermeasures that decreases the usability of the site is a highly visible way.

share|improve this question
3  
The purpose is to prevent vote fraud and gaming of the system. For instance, we don't want people to downvote answers to push theirs to the top, and then remove them later. What's wrong with just editing? No answer is so good that there isn't a some kind of edit that you can make to improve it. Then you'll be able to change your vote. –  Cody Gray Jul 15 '11 at 14:59
1  
The vote lock is there to try and stop people from gaming the system. If you do a search in meta for "Vote Lock" you'll find the posts discussing this. Extending the time-out has also been discussed before see Should the vote lock-in time be extended? –  Some Helpful Commenter Jul 15 '11 at 15:01
1  
2  
If it's only "a minute" then you're within the grace period. –  ChrisF Jul 15 '11 at 15:05
2  
Thanks for the links to the other questions. I understand, but I still think the solution is less then optimal. –  James McMahon Jul 15 '11 at 15:26
    
Edited question to talk about gaming of the system. While I understand what tactical downvoting is, I don't really understand how locking prevents it. What's to stop someone from downvoting your answer and just leaving it downvoted? –  James McMahon Jul 15 '11 at 15:33
1  
@James It costs them rep and leaves a trail, since 1k users can tell that every answer was downvoted except one –  Michael Mrozek Jul 15 '11 at 15:48
    
And what is wrong with simply downvoting all answers except one. I systematically do that to cast my impression on how I think a bunch of answers should be ordered in a question with many answers. I think this is useful for the person that is going to read them. It is a good and useful way to expend reputation. –  user226956 Jun 29 '13 at 22:16
add comment

1 Answer

The voting grace period is 5 minutes. So after clicking up or down, you have 5 minutes to change your mind.

If the final vote state is indeterminate, that is, neither up nor down, you can still change your vote at any time.

If you need to change your up or down vote after 5 minutes, you can do so by editing the underlying post -- posts which have been edited since you cast your vote are always eligible for re-voting.

share|improve this answer
3  
That seems like a very backward hack. doesnt that remove the block on exploiting votes when i could just downvote someone to gain popularity and then when i get the pop vote, edit the post and remove my vote? –  amanaP lanaC A nalP A naM A Jul 18 '11 at 18:59
    
@Neal, if are found to abuse the system in that way, I'm sure the Mods wouldn't be happy. –  jjnguy Jul 18 '11 at 19:01
    
@jjnguy -- I am not saying that I ever would. But there might be others who will –  amanaP lanaC A nalP A naM A Jul 18 '11 at 19:04
8  
@Neal: a lot of the more bizarre behaviors in SE aren't about making bad behavior impossible so much as just difficult or tedious and annoying. –  Shog9 Jul 18 '11 at 19:21
1  
@Neal - Voting is not tracked. Editing is. If you edit every other answer shortly after your post bubbles to the top, wouldn't that look a little suspicious? –  Kevin Vermeer Jul 18 '11 at 19:39
1  
@Kevin: Exactly. The edit history provides a degree of accountability. –  Robert Harvey Jul 18 '11 at 19:50
1  
This very trick (editing just so I can vote) has occurred to me before, but I didn't do it specifically because it felt like abuse. Are you actually encouraging us to exploit a loophole in the system? I can't imagine this not being thought of as one. –  Justin Morgan Jul 18 '11 at 20:08
    
@Justin: Yes, yes they are. –  staticx Jul 18 '11 at 20:16
2  
Well, in that case I'm favoriting this question so that in the future, when someone catches me doing it and complains, I can refer back to it and blame Jeff. –  Justin Morgan Jul 18 '11 at 20:34
    
You can't just edit the post and re-vote. It takes xxx reputation to edit, then you have to make more than xxx character changes, then you have to wait until someone else reviews it! –  Chloe Sep 12 '13 at 16:17
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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