It's been said by some people: If it's worth answering, it's worth upvoting

What about making an answer automatically upvote the question, unless they explicitly downvote it?

I suggest this because I have seen many cases where a reasonable question has literally five different answers, and nobody has upvoted it! This is not because it is a bad question, it's just that noone bothered to upvote it!

It seems that in the great majority of cases people are not upvoting questions out of apathy. It may be reasonable to somehow automatically upvote a question when it gets answered (except by the OP, of course). What do you think? Can it work?

  • 4
    I don't upvote a question just because it's not bad. I upvote a question because it's good. Sometimes it's not good enough for an upvote and not bad enough for a downvote – mhlester Jun 13 '14 at 20:14
  • 2
    @mhlester ... its good enough for you to ANSWER, but not upvote??? – Tyler Durden Jun 13 '14 at 20:16
  • 7
    Sure, sometimes. – mhlester Jun 13 '14 at 20:16
  • 1
    Worth answering == not bad enough to be closed. There is a sizable interval between not voting to close and voting up. – user259867 Jun 13 '14 at 21:19

One problem with this proposal I see is that I think it would hinder our efforts with the help vampire problem.

We're already having enough trouble as it is containing help-vampire questions because they tend to get a ton of answers very quickly (which only encourages the help vampire). By adding an automatic upvote per answer, the problem is that now, not only are help vampires getting answers, they're also getting a ton of upvotes, which would only encourage them more. We don't want that.


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