I know what it does. But in relation to this: Allow more than 1 comment upvote in 5 seconds, the first answer seems to imply that he would prefer people not vote that much on comments, and too many votes on comments is a bad thing.

I know that on SO, I have >400 comments, and not a single one at +10. Only a few even make +4. I hardly ever see comments voted that high unless they are very old and on old popular questions.

It seems that really, the SO zeitgeist there (which is assisted by limiting commenting upvote rate) is in conflict with the badge.

Obviously, comments are really useful - they are the common way to ask for clarification on questions, for instance. That doesn't mean they have to rewarded specifically - once you have clarification, you can give a good answer (and get rep from upvotes).

Edits seem to be given more 'rep' here - literally and figuratively. New users can't add comments (to ask clarification), but they can suggest edits. True, there is a review process around edits to keep the junk out, so maybe that's why. Edits also provide rep up to 2k, while comments, even when you're allowed to post them, don't.

Just trying to get the general gist of things.

  • 1
    I think the gist of not up-voting too many comments is to reserve them for really good comments. (And in a way, discourage ones that aren't very good.) The badge is supposed to be for really good comments, not any old comment.
    – Aaron Bertrand Staff
    Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 19:44
  • 1
    The problem I see is that "joke" comments tend to be much higher voted than others. The "super helpful" comments are edited in the answer and then they are obsolete.
    – gunr2171
    Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 19:45
  • @gunr2171 I think you'll find a lot more "joke" comments here on meta than on the main site. As for "super helpful" comments being edited into the answer, that only happens when the answerer tends to agree. Sometimes super helpful comments are the ones that point out the problems with an answer. And on old answers that have a slew of up-votes from before the problems were pointed out, up-voting those comments can make them a little more visible than just the down-votes might (since the down-votes will never offset the accumulated up-votes).
    – Aaron Bertrand Staff
    Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 19:47
  • @LowerClassOverflowian I think the smart-ass stuff is much more prevalent here than on the main site.
    – Aaron Bertrand Staff
    Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 19:58
  • 2
    Pundit is "Left 10 comments with score of 5 or more", not +10. Change was made 11/2/2010. Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 20:14
  • 1
    Here's one comment that worked towards my Pundit badge: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/223423/… Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 20:28
  • @JohnnyBones - Was actually thinking the badge makes a lot more sense on meta - on meta, the comments often are the discussion. But less likely on the main site, maybe. Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 20:29
  • True dat. Yeah, I don't think you'd see a lot of Pundit badges on SO unless it was a wise-crack. On Meta, there is definitely a lot more discussion and a lot more comments. Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 20:32
  • @MikeSmithDev - thanks for the info, dunno where i got the 10 from. Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 20:33
  • Well, over 4100 times: stackoverflow.com/help/badges/94/pundit
    – Aaron Bertrand Staff
    Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 22:49
  • @AaronBertrand - and some of those were fairly recent, so I guess it is still not that hard - certainly not as hard as some other silver badges like Generalist or Mortarboard... Commented Feb 28, 2014 at 22:57

1 Answer 1


I believe that the reasons for the rate limiting are more to limit the API calls than to prevent too many comment up-votes. That it happens to place less emphasis on comments - which have always been second-class citizens - is just a happy coincidence, I think. There are other features that are artificially rate limited for similar reasons - e.g. fetching vote counts.

That said, it can be important to rank comments and signify ones that are useful, especially in cases where there are long comment threads. Not all comments should just go away at some point, and sometimes it's impossible to do the things that make them obsolete. For example, if you point out a problem in an answer, and the answerer doesn't agree - shouldn't the community have some way to highlight the fact that your comment points out a legitimate problem, even if the answerer is unwilling to be swayed to fix it (and in a lot of cases, even address it)?

It's not about reward, so I wouldn't even place it in the same category as suggested edits for < 2K. Even though I get zero rep from any comment ever, and really don't care about the badge, having comments up-voted is kind of a nice reinforcement that my comment was useful (and that confirmation is not only useful to me but also to other readers, especially when it's an opinion contrary to the post). It can also sometimes serve as reinforcement that my comment should be expanded into an answer - sometimes I'll have a wild guess or theory about what the problem might be, and more details get culled out from that conversation.

I don't really care about the badge existing or not - it's not something you can have much control over, as you can't dictate how many unique people see your comment, and how many of those consider it useful. I don't think that it encourages people to spray useless comments all over the place, because it takes quite a good comment to get that many people to up-vote it. So I am completely indifferent about it, I just wanted to clarify that there are good reasons to keep comments around, particularly if a lot of people have found them useful.

You must log in to answer this question.

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