Understanding reputation loss as a result of a user being removed, it'd be nice to know specifically where that reputation was lost from.

Reputation changes typically cite where reputation was gained or lost; however, it's difficult to reference the origin of where it was lost when a user is removed:


Already labeled as removed, a link to the question would indicate the source of the loss, as in:

-10     6 hours ago     removed     List component to bring up InputText boxes

Perhaps there's greater complexity here than I realize, such as the question itself being deleted; however, actions such as removing an upvote to a question or answer could be linked.

marked as duplicate by Glorfindel, rene, Robert Longson, ben is uǝq backwards, ale Jul 10 '18 at 20:33

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 9
    This kinda destroys the anonymity of votes. – Mysticial Apr 23 '13 at 22:06
  • 1
    Why would you need to know that other than curiosity? – Bart Apr 23 '13 at 22:06
  • 7
    You didn't loose the 10 points because the question or an answer was deleted; those 10 points you gained from that user voting on your posts. That vote was anonymous, and should stay anonymous. – Martijn Pieters Apr 23 '13 at 22:07
  • 6
    @Mysticial How does that destroy anonymity of votes? It's not the user, but the question. Same as I know these other questions were voted upon. – Jason Sturges Apr 23 '13 at 22:07
  • 1
    @MartijnPieters Indeed - I'm wondering what question lost the upvote. – Jason Sturges Apr 23 '13 at 22:08
  • 2
    @JasonSturges In the cases of larger removals where the user voted on multiple posts, they'd all appear together. So you know they all came from the same account - in some cases, who the person is. Example: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/156507/… – Mysticial Apr 23 '13 at 22:09
  • @Bart I'd like to know if malicious activity is occurring around my posts, or in general this functionality seems atypical to how reputation is generally presented. – Jason Sturges Apr 23 '13 at 22:10
  • 3
    Users being removed is not necessarily and indication of malicious activity though. – Bart Apr 23 '13 at 22:13
  • @Mysticial I can see your point regarding being able to identify the user based upon substantial change to the site. Otherwise, it's no different than knowing a question received an upvote or downvote. – Jason Sturges Apr 23 '13 at 22:15
  • 1
    Martijn's answer is correct. We've had a couple of bugs that've inadvertently revealed parts of this, and the effects were not good (the bugs were fixed, but not before at least one person was gravely offended by having parts of his voting record revealed to all and sundry). As a general rule, anything that would reveal how another user has voted is a bug, not a feature. – Shog9 Apr 24 '13 at 3:02
  • Inverse of this question: How can I find which answer was removed when a user is deleted? – Jason Sturges Apr 30 '13 at 4:56

No, because telling you what posts the votes were removed from would give you much more information about the removed voter than you have access to now.

You lost 10 points because the votes on still existing posts were removed. The user in question once voted an answer you made up, or voted on two questions you posted. Now that the user is deleted the votes are undone.

If the system did tell you what posts lost votes, you would be told that a specific user had voted for specific posts of yours, which ones they voted up, which ones they voted down. This could help you identify whom that user might be even.

Those votes were made anonymously, and they stay anonymous by only telling you that the user voting has been removed from the system.

  • 3
    This is an incredibly ridiculous claim. You can tell just by comments, which people leave willingly, that they have upvoted or downvoted a question. It is no more revealing than comments to show which post the reputation was deducted from. – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:24
  • 4
    Wait, so when you are notified that this user upvoted your question (and you know it is that question because the system tells you), that doesn't reveal information, but when the upvote is removed by the user (or, in this case, removed due to the circumstances of the user being removed), it becomes revealing? This is illogical. – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:27
  • 3
    @Purmou: No, it is not. When you receive an upvote on a question, you do not know who voted for it. When a user is deleted, and multiple votes are removed, you suddenly have a pattern. If you had regular run-ins with a user for a specific set of subjects, you will be able to suss out who was removed, and how that person voted on your posts. – Martijn Pieters Apr 23 '13 at 22:28
  • 1
    @Purmou: Voting anonymity is important. You can't just waive it just because you don't think it'll be abused. – Martijn Pieters Apr 23 '13 at 22:32
  • 1
    @Purmou You'd be surprised to see how active users become when a user with a significant number of votes disappears. This is not some theoretical possibility that never actually happens. – Bart Apr 23 '13 at 22:35
  • 2
    @Bart: I understand that it happens, but I don't think that this request should be dismissed on the grounds that someone may or may not look into the issue further. – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:37
  • 3
    Ah, yes. That's the issue. Favoritism or, on the flipside, grudges. Can a user ever play favorites with a deleted user? Of course not. The user may end up knowing who voted, but they can do nothing with the information. They can't go and upvote that person's stuff since it is no longer attributed to that user. – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:38
  • 3
    No no no. Anonymity does not stop at the door. We do not say "you're guaranteed anonymity as long as you're with us, but when you're out, all bets are off". That would be reprehensible. – Bart Apr 23 '13 at 22:51
  • 2
    @Bart: No, it is inherent. Once you join, you have the option to vote anonymously. Offsite, you can't put a sticky-note on something that says "downvote." It is an on-site privilege just by the nature of websites... – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:52
  • 5
    @Purmou: So that is where we disagree; you feel that anonymity is but a privilege to an account, to be revoked when you leave. To me, anonymity is part of the fabric of the site; not attached to the accounts, but to the system itself. At no point, ever, should the anonymity of voting be broken. This is not about protecting the account, it is about the freedom to vote in whatever direction you feel the need to vote, without fear that that anonymity will be broken whatever the future may bring. – Martijn Pieters Apr 23 '13 at 22:52
  • 2
    Good God. You cannot vote without an account. Anonymity is BY ITS NATURE a privilege attached to an account. But forget the nature of voting and anonymity. It just makes sense to show you which question/answer had the vote removed because it's your post and you always have the right to know the vote counts on your own posts. So which supersedes the other: poster privilege or voter privilege? – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:54
  • 2
    @Purmou Once again, as stated before, that is a user who by himself decides to give up certain information. Which is a completely different scenario. – Bart Apr 23 '13 at 22:58
  • 2
    You guys are dwelling way too much on the rare possibilities that you have brought up. That's true about comments, @Bart, but either way, we don't even know that users would react that way with information about a deleted user. That which can be assumed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Hypotheticals get us nowhere. – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 22:59
  • 5
    And you guys still have issues with anonymity and grudges? A user can see if I vote to close their question and it eventually gets closed. That can certainly stir up some grudges. So don't tell me the system advocates anonymity, because the system now appears to contradict itself. – Mystery Apr 23 '13 at 23:03
  • 2
    @Arjan Sure, a highly active, high rep user leaving, will more easily be connected with a single score total as well. But "this user might possibly have voted a lot" is different from "this user might have explicitly voted up or down for these questions". As Martijn said, it "would give you much more information about the removed voter than you have access to now". – Bart Apr 27 '13 at 14:09

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