-27

This question already has an answer here:

Don't you think a downvote without a comment, even a 2 word comment, is just unnatural, non constructive and against Stack Overflow regulations itself?

I mean if someone wants to downvote, sure thing go ahead, yet at least give 1 reason for it so that the asker can know why. And if you don't want to comment, then you don't want to contribute, hence the downvote is meaningless and non constructive!

Why don't you limit "down-votes" to be submitted with a comments only? -inside post comment for a down-vote topic arrow-

edite : question splited into two topics ! link

marked as duplicate by Josh Caswell, Bart, Servy, user213963, Martijn Pieters Mar 10 '14 at 19:43

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.

  • haha this is funny :D 8 downvote in first 1 min , awsome community :D – Zalaboza Mar 10 '14 at 19:13
  • I'm here because I was considering asking the same question. Clearly, the negaters don't like being called out. People ask questions because, sometimes, it's hard to formulate the right Google search terms. Dissing the clueless without comment is disrespectful. – Bruce Mar 10 '14 at 19:14
  • 7
    Duplicate of all of this: meta.stackoverflow.com/… – Jeff Bridgman Mar 10 '14 at 19:16
  • 5
    You have two entirely unrelated issues you're bringing up here, namely downvoting without commenting, and the closing of broad questions. There is no reason for both to be in the same question. – Servy Mar 10 '14 at 19:17
  • The problem with answering lots of questions with, "google 'such and such'" is that the question can end up becoming so popular that it is the first result for "such and such". SO is a place to find answers, not be directed elsewhere for answers. Therefore, if you can't answer the question within the scope of an answer, then we can't allow the question. – Servy Mar 10 '14 at 19:26
  • @Servy i splited question as per requested by other users ! to link yet to answer you comment : if you take 1 place in google results, is better than using wrong key words and getting an 100000 unrelated search results – Zalaboza Mar 10 '14 at 19:30
  • I downvoted due to ...meh – user246806 Mar 11 '14 at 6:45
5

(Just FYI, a downvote in meta often means that the voter disagrees with your suggestion..)

Requiring a comment with downvoting would probably result in

  1. A bunch of meaningless comments like "-1"
  2. Downvoting revenge where the poster goes and downvotes people that downvoted their question

Yes, ideally people would always explain why they downvoted a question. But sometimes the effort to explain why a question is bad takes more effort that the downvoter is willing to expend, but the downvote (as well as the upvote) at least allows others in the community to get a feel for the quality of that question before reading it.

That being said, perhaps you need to work on writing better questions? For example, I see your most recent question was rather broad and probably would have been more at home on programmers.SE.

  • agree. how about broad-questions ? – Zalaboza Mar 10 '14 at 19:20
  • ``the voter disagrees with your [question being asked]'' -- yes, I know. The AccuRev guy did not like my non-AccuRev-y question and somehow managed to double down vote it. He really didn't like it. I just wanted to know how to make a patch file with the SCM management tool. Baaaad boy, I guess. So folks liking to diss other folks probably need some encouragement to be civil. :) – Bruce Mar 10 '14 at 19:31
4

I actually do attempt to comment on most posts I downvote on Arqade. I'm actually probably the most vocal advocate of downvoting more often there. This has led to some rather hostile feelings against me, for doing nothing more than trying to help. I, quite often, get people swearing at me, downvoting my posts, and many other things. I don't mind being a target, but it really isn't something that should be required, ever. Imagine if everyone were a target? Less downvoting would happen, because people don't want to deal with the fallout. Never mind that anonymous comments are what SE are built upon.

Requiring comments on downvotes means LESS downvotes happen. And you don't get an accurate picture of content quality. Downvotes are based on content, not the user. If you take it personally, well, it's not personal. Improve your posts, and the upvotes will outweigh the downvotes rather easily.

1

don't you think a down vote without a comment -even a 2 words comment- is just unnatural , non constructive and against S.O regulations it self?

I see your perspective, however.. no. We want that easy voting power :-)

You're forgetting that communication is often non-verbal. In a sense, the downvote is the most basic communication.

It's "yes" or "no" for upvote or downvote

sure it hurts sometimes, but come on. Grow some thick skin ; )

I'm really lost about the rest of your post. The "broad" label is done via 5 mods. So it's not totally random

  • 1
    it does not hurt at all, its just that if a NO has a reason you will learn from it !, like "DOWNVOTE : GOOGLE array_merge retard" still answered your question :p – Zalaboza Mar 10 '14 at 19:19
  • 2
    @Zalaboza - People are lazy, so what'll happen is that nobody will even downvote anymore – Adel Mar 10 '14 at 19:20
  • or they write any old gibberish – user246806 Mar 11 '14 at 6:46

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