Timeline for My answer down-voted because it had just (recently) become out of date
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 2011 at 7:35 | comment | added | PandaWood | I downvoted this answer, just to motivate you ;-) | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:58 | comment | added | Kev | @rebecca - yes the comment was made 8hrs ago (15:00 GMT/UTC). i5 and panda are in completely opposite timezones (12hrs apart). panda would have still been tucked up in bed (it would have been around 03:00 local time for him. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:52 | comment | added | Rebecca Chernoff Mod | @Kev, so your suggestion is for the person to comment? Look at the question. There is a comment. No guarantee it is from the downvoter, but there is a comment on the answer. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:49 | comment | added | Kev | @rebecca - and I'm saying there are less friction generating approaches that have a better outcome, not everyone is as philosophical or is a Vulcan. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:41 | comment | added | Rebecca Chernoff Mod | @Kev, I know some people do. I'm saying there's no need to. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:39 | comment | added | Kev | @rebecca - Yes well, in the real world people do. Hell even the great Jon Skeet does, I know because I downvoted one of his answers and it sure put his nose out of joint. Just saying. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:28 | comment | added | Rebecca Chernoff Mod | @Kev, To be clear, I'm not speaking to the specific question here. The answer did receive a comment indicating it was out-of-date. Whether or not that user is the downvoter isn't the issue though. I'm referring to an overall how-to-use-SO sort of thing. People shouldn't see it as a negative. They shouldn't let it rub them the wrong way. If they care, work to improve. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:28 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Hans: For all I know, whoever down-voted that answer did up-vote another one... I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter to say whether that makes sense or not. There are seven answers on that question already though, so it wouldn't surprise me. That a down-vote didn't motivate the author is hardly surprising though - he appears to disagree with the lone complaint posted anyway. Which is certainly his prerogative... so long as he's willing to accept the down-votes of those who disagree. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:16 | comment | added | Uphill Luge | @Shog9 - no clue why you'd think I don't expect voters to make it happen, I paraphrased the should clause in this answer. It does however require posting a new answer first. If that doesn't happen then, yes, not a lot of floating is going to happen. Getting a meat ball answer to the top by downvoting everything else can't be the goal. Clearly it didn't inspire the OP much to do anything else but strike some text from his answer. Can't say I blame him, that lazy act wasn't motivating. If anybody has a better answer, post it. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:15 | comment | added | Kev | @shog - if you think that's ok then fine. I'm happy to nudge folks into action before hitting the downvote button. I'll agree to disagree. @rebecca - second to post flagging, downvoting is the most negative action that can be carried out on a post. Folks get rubbed the wrong way by that, it's human nature. And you know we're not all Sheldon Cooper's so I'm happy to allow some lee-way to let folks fix on human time, not internet time. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:07 | comment | added | Rebecca Chernoff Mod | @Kev, Voting is as valid a way as a comment to indicate something is up with a post. It does give the user a chance to edit and improve his/her answer. Downvoting is not harmful communication, it is simply communication. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 22:05 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Kev: voting is communication. It speaks to other readers, it speaks to the author... Why throw this away, and make more work for yourself by abstaining? If the author updates the answer, you can always come back (at any time, three hours, three days, three months...) later and reverse your vote. Why put yourself, and the author, on a fixed schedule that may not work for either one of you? | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:59 | comment | added | Kev | I think some of you take the rules far too literally, yes we're here to keep a high standard of content, but communication is also key in communities, give people a chance to fix something first. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:52 | comment | added | Rebecca Chernoff Mod | @Kev, I've been a mod since August. Downvoting isn't being mean. It helps keep StackOverflow high quality. Don't take a downvote personally, improve your post. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:49 | comment | added | nico | @Kev: An out of date answer is a bad answer. You vote the answer, not the person, nor his/her effort. There should be NOTHING personal in a vote, so you should not feel offended if someone downvoted your answer. I think we're all here to build a collection of good Q&A not to increase our score. I don't want to come back 3 days later before downvoting. When I downvote an answer I always comment on why I did it, so the person can answer me, I'll be notified and I can remove the downvote if the explanation is satisfactory. The fault here is not the downvote, but the lack of explanation. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:48 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Kev: if you think down-voting equates to "not being nice" (or that up-voting does equate to niceness), then you clearly misunderstand the entire purpose of voting. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:46 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Hans: saying a new answer will float to the top is just wishful thinking if you don't expect voters to make that happen. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:46 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Kev: votes are lazy by design. They're by far the easiest way to leave feedback. And no, down-votes are not a penalty - they extract a token amount of reputation, but hardly enough to matter; for all his angst, Pandawood is still ahead of the game rep-wise. It's supposed to get the author's attention, and it did. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:44 | comment | added | Kev | And maybe as a new mod you need to go and re-read the FAQ which does remind people to "be nice". | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:41 | comment | added | Kev | And there's a comment feature to nudge folks into action. Why rub people the wrong way. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:39 | comment | added | Rebecca Chernoff Mod | Read the tooltips. A downvote means the answer is not useful. If the answer is out of date, is it useful? | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:35 | comment | added | Kev | @shog - no as Hans pointed out that's just plain lazy. A downvote is a penalty, it's there to penalise "bad" questions and answers. Pandawood took some effort to provide information that was correct at the time and from the history has been tweaking the answer. He could have been given a grace period to bring the answer up to date. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:20 | comment | added | Uphill Luge | Just not for the contributors. This was a lazy downvote, he could just as well have posted an up-to-date answer that did a proper job of documenting what was new. Which should float to the top. Good for the question, the readers, the site, and the people that keep the readers coming back and Rebecca in her new job. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:17 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Kev: it's not about penalizing the author, it's about ranking answers according to their usefulness. Adding a three-day waiting period turns a quick vote or vote+comment into a lengthy process (which is to say, a process that won't be followed). Better by far to down-vote, leave a comment, and then (if the author updates the answer and responds) return to revert the vote. That's the primary reason why votes can be changed following an edit... | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 21:15 | comment | added | Kev | @shog, @rebecca - I think the person answering the question should be given the opportunity to update the answer before being penalised. A brief comment would have been better and if the answer isn't amended to reflect the latest info within two or three days then yeah go ahead and downvote. If you've posted more than a few tens of answers you can't be expected to keep on top of every one of them as time, technology and releases roll on. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 20:52 | comment | added | Shog9 | Exactly - this behavior is good for the question, the readers, and the site. | |
| Jan 10, 2011 at 20:42 | history | answered | Rebecca ChernoffMod | CC BY-SA 2.5 |