I'm facing an issue, quite often debated (like in Why are there voting limits? and like the 4 firs page I found about vote up limit) : I am feeling really restricted by vote up limit.

Please, read the below explanations before downvote (which would probably happen for some of you)


There is a few days ago, I was still accepting that the limit was a real need ... there were some stupid users that wrote script for automatic voting, this is a great responsibility (thanks to Spiderman ;D), etc.
I quickly and easily earned Civic Duty badge (at least easily on SO ;)), and I found that the limit was reasonable.

But since the new reviewing functionality checks that you don't have reached the maximum upvotes (for first posts), I can't reward really good question and review posts at the same time. I read some fantastic answers about software versioning with Maven, that should be top rated for the rest or their electronics life ( ;) ) ... and I could not promote them !

I feel, now, I'm enough experienced on Stack Exchange to be respectful and "narrow", at least really more than I voted up for the first time :).


So, I think now (due to reviewing module at least), vote up limit should be increased with different caps, like :

  • +1 more vote by day, every 1k reputation limited to 5 or 10 times
  • +2 more vote by day, (maybe +5) with civic duty badge
  • +? more vote by day, (with every reviewer badge depending on its value (+1 for custodian + 2 for reviewer)
  • +5 more vote by day, (maybe +10) with electorate badge

Those limits are obviously examples and should be reviewed too.
I hope you will help me to design reasonable rule.

  • 7
    He is not asking about recieving, but rather about the ability to give additional upvotes past the current daily limit – Azulflame Sep 26 '12 at 16:20
  • @azuflame sorry, I read +1, +2, +5 as rep increase, not vote counts. Still, I think this would be a very complicated algorithm for the software to monitor... and also seems to contradict the reason we have limits in the first place (to limit the amount of time you spend on the site). – Aaron Bertrand Sep 26 '12 at 16:25
  • 2
    So people with more rep get to spend more rep? I believe this is rather skewing the (already unbalanced) system of a few users who vote a lot and the rest which basically doesn't. – slhck Sep 26 '12 at 16:30

I agree with you. I have found these reasons:


  • Allows the more experienced users on Meta and other sites to voice their opinions on more matters than are currently possible
  • Allows the community to show greater appreciation to the well-thought answers and questions
  • Allows the larger members of the community to have a slightly larger voice than the people who just log on once or twice a week


  • If SO does this to upvotes, they would have to alter thier rep systems, auto-flag systems(for 'power-upvotes' (can't remember the term))
  • They would most likely make these harder to get as you go on, and more people would go on these sites more and more, creating addictions (or furthering current ones)

This is community wiki, so add what you think this would do to the community.

  • 2
    I think this should be posted as two separate answers. How can I up-vote an answer that lists both pros and cons? – Aaron Bertrand Sep 26 '12 at 16:27
  • 3
    That's not really how community wiki works, for example I disagree that some of your "pros" points are actually pros. Should I just remove them? – yannis Sep 26 '12 at 16:35
  • You rearrange them as you see fit, if it's community wiki – Azulflame Sep 26 '12 at 16:49
  • 1
    That'll only lead to multiple people editing the same post as they see fit, which results in edits overwriting each other and people rolling back to versions they prefer. Post individual positions as separate posts and let people vote on these instead. – slhck Sep 26 '12 at 16:59
  • @azulflame I've re-arranged them (sorry, couldn't resist ;) – yannis Sep 26 '12 at 18:06

You must log in to answer this question.

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