Return to Answer

This has been talked about before, at least a little bit. Back when he tried it (around Christmas?) that changing the time rep limit to a per-post rep limit made little difference. Personally I still think it would be a good idea. You should probably read all the arguments for and against the current time-based limit in this feature request (declined).

I'll keep being in favour of this, but at the same time I don't expect the situation to change any time soon.

EDIT: (On phone - please excuse typos.) I think it's worth thinking about the purpose of rep limits in general. One point is to limit how quickly/easily someone can get edit rights etc. I would argue that someone who posts 20 answers each of which gains 10 upvotes in a single day has proved themselves more invested in the community than someone who posts a single popular answer which gains 200 upvotes over the course of three months - during which time they may not even come back. To me, the first person deserves all the rep from their answers, but the second person's rep could reasonably be capped at (say) 500 for that one answer. In particular, positive feedback makes is a lot easier for a post to go from e.g. 40 votes to 45 than from 0 to 5.

Having said all this, I'm not as bothered as all of this discussion makes it sound. Rep limits are somewhat important in terms of early access to privs, but they probably don't deserve quite the attention some of us pay them... I would like to hear Jeff and Joel discuss this a bit more on the podcast though.

This has been talked about before, at least a little bit. Back when he tried it (around Christmas?) that changing the time rep limit to a per-post rep limit made little difference. Personally I still think it would be a good idea. You should probably read all the arguments for and against the current time-based limit in this feature request (declined).

I'll keep being in favour of this, but at the same time I don't expect the situation to change any time soon.

EDIT: (On phone - please excuse typos.) I think it's worth thinking about the purpose of rep limits in general. One point is to limit how quickly/easily someone can get edit rights etc. I would argue that someone who posts 20 answers each of which gains 10 upvotes in a single day has proved themselves more invested in the community than someone who posts a single popular answer which gains 200 upvotes over the course of three months - during which time they may not even come back. To me, the first person deserves all the rep from their answers, but the second person's rep could reasonably be capped at (say) 500 for that one answer. In particular, positive feedback makes is a lot easier for a post to go from e.g. 40 votes to 45 than from 0 to 5.

Having said all this, I'm not as bothered as all of this discussion makes it sound. Rep limits are somewhat important in terms of early access to privs, but they probably don't deserve quite the attention some of us pay them... I would like to hear Jeff and Joel discuss this a bit more on the podcast though.

This has been talked about before, at least a little bit. Back when he tried it (around Christmas?) that changing the time rep limit to a per-post rep limit made little difference. Personally I still think it would be a good idea. You should probably read all the arguments for and against the current time-based limit in this feature request (declined).

I'll keep being in favour of this, but at the same time I don't expect the situation to change any time soon.

EDIT: (On phone - please excuse typos.) I think it's worth thinking about the purpose of rep limits in general. One point is to limit how quickly/easily someone can get edit rights etc. I would argue that someone who posts 20 answers each of which gains 10 upvotes in a single day has proved themselves more invested in the community than someone who posts a single popular answer which gains 200 upvotes over the course of three months - during which time they may not even come back. To me, the first person deserves all the rep from their answers, but the second person's rep could reasonably be capped at (say) 500 for that one answer. In particular, positive feedback makes is a lot easier for a post to go from e.g. 40 votes to 45 than from 0 to 5.

Having said all this, I'm not as bothered as all of this discussion makes it sound. Rep limits are somewhat important in terms of early access to privs, but they probably don't deserve quite the attention some of us pay them... I would like to hear Jeff and Joel discuss this a bit more on the podcast though.

This has been talked about before, at least a little bit. Back when he tried it (around Christmas?) that changing the time rep limit to a per-post rep limit made little difference. Personally I still think it would be a good idea. You should probably read all the arguments for and against the current time-based limit in this feature request (declined).

I'll keep being in favour of this, but at the same time I don't expect the situation to change any time soon.

EDIT: (On phone - please excuse typos.) I think it's worth thinking about the purpose of rep limits in general. One point is to limit how quickly/easily someone can get edit rights etc. I would argue that someone who posts 20 answers each of which gains 10 upvotes in a single day has proved themselves more invested in the community than someone who posts a single popular answer which gains 200 upvotes over the course of three months - during which time they may not even come back. To me, the first person deserves all the rep from their answers, but the second person's rep could reasonably be capped at (say) 500 for that one answer. In particular, positive feedback makes is a lot easier for a post to go from e.g. 40 votes to 45 than from 0 to 5.

Having said all this, I'm not as bothered as all of this discussion makes it sound. Rep limits are somewhat important in terms of early access to privs, but they probably don't deserve quite the attention some of us pay them... I would like to hear Jeff and Joel discuss this a bit more on the podcast though.

This has been talked about before, at least a little bit. Back when he tried it (around Christmas?) that changing the time rep limit to a per-post rep limit made little difference. Personally I still think it would be a good idea. You should probably read all the arguments for and against the current time-based limit in this feature request (declined).

I'll keep being in favour of this, but at the same time I don't expect the situation to change any time soon.

EDIT: (On phone - please excuse typos.) I think it's worth thinking about the purpose of rep limits in general. One point is to limit how quickly/easily someone can get edit rights etc. I would argue that someone who posts 20 answers each of which gains 10 upvotes in a single day has proved themselves more invested in the community than someone who posts a single popular answer which gains 200 upvotes over the course of three months - during which time they may not even come back. To me, the first person deserves all the rep from their answers, but the second person's rep could reasonably be capped at (say) 500 for that one answer. In particular, positive feedback makes is a lot easier for a post to go from e.g. 40 votes to 45 than from 0 to 5.

Having said all this, I'm not as bothered as all of this discussion makes it sound. Rep limits are somewhat important in terms of early access to privs, but they probably don't deserve quite the attention some of us pay them... I would like to hear Jeff and Joel discuss this a bit more on the podcast though.

This has been talked about before, at least a little bit. Back when he tried it (around Christmas?) that changing the time rep limit to a per-post rep limit made little difference. Personally I still think it would be a good idea. You should probably read all the arguments for and against the current time-based limit in this feature request (declined).

I'll keep being in favour of this, but at the same time I don't expect the situation to change any time soon.

EDIT: (On phone - please excuse typos.) I think it's worth thinking about the purpose of rep limits in general. One point is to limit how quickly/easily someone can get edit rights etc. I would argue that someone who posts 20 answers each of which gains 10 upvotes in a single day has proved themselves more invested in the community than someone who posts a single popular answer which gains 200 upvotes over the course of three months - during which time they may not even come back. To me, the first person deserves all the rep from their answers, but the second person's rep could reasonably be capped at (say) 500 for that one answer. In particular, positive feedback makes is a lot easier for a post to go from e.g. 40 votes to 45 than from 0 to 5.

Having said all this, I'm not as bothered as all of this discussion makes it sound. Rep limits are somewhat important in terms of early access to privs, but they probably don't deserve quite the attention some of us pay them... I would like to hear Jeff and Joel discuss this a bit more on the podcast though.