Sometimes you wish you have the ability to upvote a very good post multiple times. The same idea applies for bad posts.

To make it more controllable, we can grant such privilege to high-rep users (for example, above 10K). Also, the number of allowed upvotes/downvotes can be increased by reputation (for example, every 5K will grant a user one more extra upvote/downvote capability per post).

Another idea is to make it automatic. In other words, an upvote from a 10K user will grant the post owner 20 rep instead of 10 as opposed to other upvoters (below 10K rep users).

  • 8
    If this feature is available then i want to downvote this question 100 times – Ankit Sharma Apr 18 '12 at 14:10
  • 3
    Why though? Applying a scale to votes would only confuse their meaning and high-rep users are not necessarily more correct than lower-rep users. Generally bad questions get enough downvotes (or closed) and good ones receive the upvotes they deserve. – Bart Apr 18 '12 at 14:13
  • @Jason_vorhees: Can you please clarify why this would be a bad idea? – Khaled Apr 18 '12 at 14:14
  • And before you ask downvotes on Meta have a different meaning, just in case you don't know. – Bart Apr 18 '12 at 14:14
  • @Khaled see my answer – Ankit Sharma Apr 18 '12 at 14:17
  • 1
    At the end of day, I may end up with 1 rep only because of this post! – Khaled Apr 18 '12 at 14:17
  • 2
    @Khaled But then again, Meta rep has very little meaning. Don't sweat it too much. And with your idea in place it would have taken only 5 high-rep users to achieve that fact. ;) – Bart Apr 18 '12 at 14:18
  • 1
    So Jon Skeet can nuke anything from orbit? – Kevin Apr 18 '12 at 14:20
  • Will I get a not-nice badge for -10 rep for this post!? – Khaled Apr 18 '12 at 14:20
  • @Kevin Jon Skeet does not need a feature-request for that. – Bart Apr 18 '12 at 14:20

No. That's what bounties are for.

If you like it, put a bounty on it.

| improve this answer | |

No! One man, one vote!

Our (grand) parents fought hard for that.

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    What. Seriously, how is this a reason? I can see how people upvote this for the lolz, but isn't the whole point of SO to leverage the good properties of a meritocracy? – l0b0 Apr 18 '12 at 14:48
  • 1
    @l0b0 Yes it is, and part of a meritocracy is everyone having a say in what gives something merit. If we scale votes with rep John Skeet could override about half the community on SO :-) – voretaq7 Apr 18 '12 at 14:53
  • Nobody was talking about linear scaling of anything. Everyone does have a say, but your own reputation isn't meaningless - It really gauges how well you read, understand, solve, write and follow up on questions and answers. – l0b0 Apr 18 '12 at 14:57

What's the benefit of it at all?
This will only increase the list of complaints against mods.
If something deserves more upvotes, then there are so many users already available for it, no need for a single user to upvote it more than one time. Same for downvotes.
So there is no benefit from your request.

| improve this answer | |
  • I thought it will be similar to other granted privileges for high-rep users. – Khaled Apr 18 '12 at 14:18
  • its just to made thing worse, this will make single mod to to anything thats wrong – Ankit Sharma Apr 18 '12 at 15:20

You must log in to answer this question.

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