Return to Answer

You have saying even with 1 rep. You have no say only if you are on a post ban. On the Meta SE, as I've heard, this post ban happens only in really exceptional cases. Its reason is the freedom of expression.

Meta SE was once the meta.stackoverflow.com. Until some years ago, the meta SO was both the meta of the stackoverflow and of the whole SE network. Later they were divided.

On the site metas, votes still exist, but they don't affect the reputation. Its obvious reason is that not your meta popularity matters, instead your contributions to the main site. The SE doesn't want complaints and flamewars, they want a lot of visitors producing good content (to attract more visitors).

The meta SE, this site, is different. It doesn't belong to a main site, it is essentially the meta of the whole SE network. It doesn't have mod elections, rather the CMs are its mods. It is essentially a "chief justice department", thus if you want to contribute here, you have some high reason for that. Thus, here, despite that it is a meta, we have rep what we can lose with an unpopular post.

The downvoter circles are not so hard here as on the site metas, because also they know, doing really bad things are much more visible for the SE (note, the CMs can see induvidual votes if they really want). Many of these collective downvoters also think, that producing an antidemocratic, single-tone atmosphere is actually a positive thing. "Help to find the best answer for all questions", around so looks their world view. Although their downs are here more painful, because we have here real rep.

But don't forget: a single upvote balances 5 downs, and a single accept balances 7.5. It seems, the SE refuses only the,contributions of the very unpopular posters. If you are over this limit which is not hard even in my case, you are around okay, and they can't do anything.

You have saying even with 1 rep. You have no say only if you are on a post ban. On the Meta SE, as I've heard, this post ban happens only in really exceptional cases. Its reason is the freedom of expression.

Meta SE was once the meta.stackoverflow.com. Until some years ago, the meta SO was both the meta of the stackoverflow and of the whole SE network. Later they were divided.

On the site metas, votes still exist, but they don't affect the reputation. Its obvious reason is that not your meta popularity matters, instead your contributions to the main site. The SE doesn't want complaints and flamewars, they want a lot of visitors producing good content (to attract more visitors).

The meta SE, this site, is different. It doesn't belong to a main site, it is essentially the meta of the whole SE network. It doesn't have mod elections, rather the CMs are its mods. It is essentially a "chief justice department", thus if you want to contribute here, you have some high reason for that. Thus, here, despite that it is a meta, we have rep what we can lose with an unpopular post.

The downvoter circles are not so hard here as on the site metas, because also they know, doing really bad things are much more visible for the SE (note, the CMs can see induvidual votes if they really want). Many of these collective downvoters also think, that producing an antidemocratic, single-tone atmosphere is actually a positive thing. "Help to find the best answer for all questions", around so looks their world view. Although their downs are here more painful, because we have here real rep.

But don't forget: a single upvote balances 5 downs, and a single accept balances 7.5. It seems, the SE refuses only the contributions of the very unpopular posters. If you are over this limit which is not hard even in my case, you are around okay, and they can't do anything.

You have saying even with 1 rep. You have no say only if you are on a post ban. On the Meta SE, as I've heard, this post ban happens only in really exceptional cases. Its reason is the freedom of expression.

Meta SE was once the meta.stackoverflow.com. Until some years ago, the meta SO was both the meta of the stackoverflow and of the whole SE network. Later they were divided.

On the site metas, votes still exist, but they don't affect the reputation. Its obvious reason is that not your meta popularity matters, instead your contributions to the main site. The SE doesn't want complaints and flamewars, they want a lot of visitors producing good content (to attract more visitors).

The meta SE, this site, is different. It doesn't belong to a main site, it is essentially the meta of the whole SE network. It doesn't have mod elections, rather the CMs are its mods. It is essentially a "chief justice department", thus if you want to contribute here, you have some high reason for that. Thus, here, despite that it is a meta, we have rep what we can lose with an unpopular post.

The downvoter circles are not so hard here as on the site metas, because also they know, doing really bad things are much more visible for the SE (note, the CMs can see induvidual votes if they really want). Many of these collective downvoters also think, that producing an antidemocratic, single-tone atmosphere is actually a positive thing. "Help to find the best answer for all questions", around so looks their world view. Although their downs are here more painful, because we have here real rep.

But don't forget: a single upvote balances 5 downs, and a single accept balances 7.5. It seems, the SE refuses only the,contributions of the very unpopular posters. If you are over this limit, which is not hard even in my case, you are around okay, and they can't do anything.

You have saying even with 1 rep. You have no say only if you are on a post ban. On the Meta SE, as I've heard, this post ban happens only in really exceptional cases. Its reason is the freedom of expression.

Meta SE was once the meta.stackoverflow.com. Until some years ago, the meta SO was both the meta of the stackoverflow and of the whole SE network. Later they were divided.

On the site metas, votes still exist, but they don't affect the reputation. Its obvious reason is that not your meta popularity matters, instead your contributions to the main site. The SE doesn't want complaints and flamewars, they want a lot of visitors producing good content (to attract more visitors).

The meta SE, this site, is different. It doesn't belong to a main site, it is essentially the meta of the whole SE network. It doesn't have mod elections, rather the CMs are its mods. It is essentially a "chief justice department", thus if you want to contribute here, you have some high reason for that. Thus, here, despite that it is a meta, we have rep what we can lose with an unpopular post.

The downvoter circles are not so hard here as on the site metas, because also they know, doing really bad things are much more visible for the SE (note, the CMs can see induvidual votes if they really want). Many of these collective downvoters also think, that producing an antidemocratic, single-tone atmosphere is actually a positive thing. "Help to find the best answer for all questions", around so looks their world view. Although their downs are here more painful, because we have here real rep.

But don't forget: a single upvote balances 5 downs, and a single accept balances 7.5. It seems, the SE refuses only the,contributions of the very unpopular posters. If you are over this limit which is not hard even in my case, you are around okay, and they can't do anything.

You have saying even with 1 rep. You have no say only if you are on a post ban. On the Meta SE, as I've heard, this post ban happens only in really exceptional cases. Its reason is the freedom of expression.

Meta SE was once the meta.stackoverflow.com. Until some years ago, the meta SO was both the meta of the stackoverflow and of the whole SE network. Later they were divided.

On the site metas, votes still exist, but they don't affect the reputation. Its obvious reason is that not your meta popularity matters, instead your contributions to the main site. The SE doesn't want complaints and flamewars, they want a lot of visitors producing good content (to attract more visitors).

The meta SE, this site, is different. It doesn't belong to a main site, it is essentially the meta of the whole SE network. It doesn't have mod elections, rather the CMs are its mods. It is essentially a "chief justice department", thus if you want to contribute here, you have some high reason for that. Thus, here, despite that it is a meta, we have rep what we can lose with an unpopular post.

The downvoter circles are not so hard here as on the site metas, because also they know, doing really bad things are much more visible for the SE (note, the CMs can see induvidual votes if they really want). Many of them also thinks, that producing an antidemocratic, single-tone atmosphere is actually a positive thing. "Help to find the best answer for all questions", around so looks their world view. Although their downs are here more painful, because we have here real rep.

But don't forget: a single upvote balances 5 downs, and a single accept balances 7.5. It seems, the SE refuses only the,contributions of the very unpopular posters. If you are over this limit, which is not hard even in my case, you are around okay, and they can't do anything.

You have saying even with 1 rep. You have no say only if you are on a post ban. On the Meta SE, as I've heard, this post ban happens only in really exceptional cases. Its reason is the freedom of expression.

Meta SE was once the meta.stackoverflow.com. Until some years ago, the meta SO was both the meta of the stackoverflow and of the whole SE network. Later they were divided.

On the site metas, votes still exist, but they don't affect the reputation. Its obvious reason is that not your meta popularity matters, instead your contributions to the main site. The SE doesn't want complaints and flamewars, they want a lot of visitors producing good content (to attract more visitors).

The meta SE, this site, is different. It doesn't belong to a main site, it is essentially the meta of the whole SE network. It doesn't have mod elections, rather the CMs are its mods. It is essentially a "chief justice department", thus if you want to contribute here, you have some high reason for that. Thus, here, despite that it is a meta, we have rep what we can lose with an unpopular post.

The downvoter circles are not so hard here as on the site metas, because also they know, doing really bad things are much more visible for the SE (note, the CMs can see induvidual votes if they really want). Many of these collective downvoters also think, that producing an antidemocratic, single-tone atmosphere is actually a positive thing. "Help to find the best answer for all questions", around so looks their world view. Although their downs are here more painful, because we have here real rep.

But don't forget: a single upvote balances 5 downs, and a single accept balances 7.5. It seems, the SE refuses only the,contributions of the very unpopular posters. If you are over this limit, which is not hard even in my case, you are around okay, and they can't do anything.