I have read number of posts on serial upvoting being reversed. However I am still not sure why following occurred:

Yesterday I got all famous reversal for a first time (-60 to be exact). And of course I did not know what it meant until I checked other posts. And it all seems more or less logical to me, i.e. sockpupet/overzealous user/etc decided to randomly (or maybe not randomly) upped my votes in matter of milliseconds/seconds. That is all being OK to me but what I noticed is following:

My rep from day before clearly shows that I got 5 votes (= 50 rep points) in matter of nanoseconds:

enter image description here

And (as I now know) as expected those votes got deducted next day.

But the things I do not understand are following:
I got deducted 60 points instead of 50. So I can conclude/guess following: The system looked at the votes I got and also removed votes from that same user/ip address/some-thing-else that were on cast on a different day.
1) Am I correct?


2) Does the person/account get notification that they have abused the system and that any votes for ME or someone they serially upvoted will not be counted?

3) I can see that a person liked my initial post several days prior and then decided to do upvoting (for unknown reason to me) few days back. I am not sure if that initial post should be deducted. My gut feeling says that it should not have been deducted. Am I wrong to think this way? Or maybe algorithm did think of this already and I actually got 70 points from that account but it deducted only 60 (I do not have access to the log so I cannot say).

I like reading :) so feel free just to post links relevant information it will be sufficient.

  • 1
    Felt the same pain. Somebody definitely gave me a ride on the upboat, but that capsized today...
    – wmarbut
    Dec 14, 2012 at 6:07

1 Answer 1


The exact algorithm is not public, so I doubt that you'll get an authorative answer on your first question.

The user that has his serial votes reversed doesn't get any notification that this happened. If a user is frequently misusing the voting system this way, he might be contacted by a moderator, though.

I can see arguments for both behaviours, for only deleting the actual votes that triggered the script, and for deleting all the votes between the specific users in one direction. In most cases I'd consider only deleting the actual serial votes the right way, serial upvotes are often cast by well-meaning users that found some good answer by a specific user and checked their profile. There's no need to invalidate any older votes then. Invalidating all the votes makes sense in cases of actual vote fraud, when a sockpuppet is used to artificially inflate reputation. Distinguishing these cases is not all that easy though, I suspect.

You must log in to answer this question.

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