Even though this is a very very minor issue, I still think it is an issue. (And I don't think this is a duplicate as the possible duplicate is while this issue is obviously not status-completed as it happened "just now").

If you have the correct timing when there's a new day on a Stack Exchange site, you can get the DVLR message to say "Daily vote limit reached; vote again just now." which just doesn't sound grammatically correct. "just now" is normally used for things that has already happened.

Daily vote limit reached; vote again just now.

A better message would be: "Daily vote limit reached; vote again now." or "Daily vote limit reached; vote again momentarily." (which is the same message as what is shown shortly before this message can appear)

  • 34
    +1 just for the timing involved in generating this! Mar 9, 2014 at 0:48
  • 3
    That timing is just before the daily resets. Happens at 15 odd minutes past GMT 0000.
    – Achrome
    Mar 9, 2014 at 0:55
  • 2
    Haha, I didn't tag this as a bug thinking that I would get down-voted, or not many up-votes because the community didn't consider it important enough. Apparently it looks like the community agrees that this is a bug :) Mar 9, 2014 at 1:08
  • @LowerClassOverflowian That possible duplicate is marked as status-completed, while this issue is obviously not completed. It's likely related, but I wouldn't consider it a duplicate. Mar 9, 2014 at 1:15
  • 21
    I suggest to change this message to "Look, a banana! ...Ok try that again now." Mar 9, 2014 at 1:23
  • 1
    I want this! now
    – gnat
    Mar 20, 2014 at 22:12
  • 7
    I am retagging this (again) because I am really not looking for support here. I don't need help with a site functionality. I know how the functionality is and I think it's a flaw in it. A small flaw sure, but it is still a flaw. Mar 21, 2014 at 8:27

2 Answers 2


This looks like a pretty good place to hide a hat.

Congratulations, you've earned the Bolt Start hat. See your profile.

In August 2009 the IAAF announced that from January 2010, a zero-tolerance stance to false-starts would be adopted. Athletes false starting are now immediately disqualified.[7] The following year the rule led to prominent disqualifications at the 2011 World Championships in Athletics: world record holder Usain Bolt was disqualified from the 100 m final. (wikipedia)

Otherwise, I have a few suggestions to replace the offending message:

  • Ready, set, vote!!
  • Look, a banana waffles! ...Ok try that again now.
  • Spawn this message box twice in a row to win a unicorn plush. Kidding. Should be good now.
  • 12
    It's not a bug, it's a hat! Mar 10, 2014 at 7:33
  • 1
    For the record: It is no hat. At least not this year :( Dec 16, 2014 at 17:33
  • 5
    @SimonAndréForsberg what, you actually managed to get a repro on that??? Dec 16, 2014 at 17:34
  • 3
    Yup. The text bug is still there. No fix, and no hat. Dec 16, 2014 at 17:35
  • 1
    I'm un-accepting this answer until it actually becomes a hat. Haven't verified yet if it is a hat this year. Dec 17, 2017 at 21:14

I rather suspect anyone seeing this will have already seen a dozen variations on it, since they'll have been sitting there impatiently clicking while waiting for the day to tick over.

But if anyone gets it into their head to actually special-case this ridiculously obscure scenario, the only appropriate message is surely,

Click more slowly!

  • 4
    I've only seen the normal "vote again in x seconds", "vote again momentarily", and this one. Just because it happens rarely doesn't mean that it shouldn't be handled properly for when it actually does happen. Mar 9, 2014 at 1:23
  • 4
    @SimonAndréForsberg I think he's implying you do a lot of trying to vote at the exact right second instead of reading a blog post or making tea or whatever else it is people do in the oblivion that is waiting until they can vote again on SO, which your receiving the full suite of messages would corroborate, not refute.
    – djechlin
    Mar 9, 2014 at 1:27
  • 2
    @djechlin Sure, I'm sitting and clicking the button several times, waiting for the moment when I can use my votes again. Since when is it a bad thing to want to vote? Mar 9, 2014 at 1:31
  • @SimonAndréForsberg in that case I'm +1'ing this answer. I mean, there's a limit for a reason, and it has to do with the fact that there's things you should be doing besides voting all the time, but if that really is all you do, then yes, Shog9 has a point, you're probably well versed in these error messages anyway.
    – djechlin
    Mar 9, 2014 at 1:39
  • 3
    @djechlin FYI, I have simply down-voted this answer because of Shog9's attitude in writing the answer. The whole attitude of this answer is honestly not something I expected from a Stack Exchange community manager. All I'm looking for here with this question is to make Stack Exchange better, and I don't see how this answer is doing that. Mar 9, 2014 at 1:42
  • 6
    Nothing wrong with wanting to vote, @Simon. But unless you're extremely [un]lucky, you've probably already seen a message that told you how long to wait - and you tried to vote again just a hair short of that. So be honest: you know what the situation is and what to do about it... ;-)
    – Shog9
    Mar 9, 2014 at 1:57
  • +1 for the rationality (and common sense).
    – Ken White
    Mar 9, 2014 at 5:53
  • @Shog9 Sure I know how long I have to wait, but if I just wait half a second less than that I get a funny-looking message with incorrect grammar. Mar 9, 2014 at 11:27
  • 1
    @SimonAndréForsberg I think the point is that this is a trivial corner case, and there is little benefit in chasing it down. You told the doctor it hurts when you do this, and the doctor says, "Well, don't do that." We're done here.
    – Chris
    Mar 20, 2014 at 22:00
  • @Chris Just because it's a "trivial corner case" doesn't mean it isn't worth fixing. I mean, it's just a string... it really can't be that hard fixing. Even a little "dirty" if-else would solve it. Mar 21, 2014 at 8:23
  • 1
    @Chris Looking at the votes on this question, it has 30 up-votes and 4 down-votes. So no, we're not "done here". Mar 21, 2014 at 13:40

You must log in to answer this question.

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