I've upvoted a question but after 5 minutes I thought it wasn't such a good question after all. Now my vote is locked and I can't revoke it unless I do an edit specifically for that purpose (is that a desired effect on SE? I think not).

A question here, Vote lockdown (after some time): is it possible to revoke or soften?, explains with good arguments why the vote lock exists on answers. The reasoning there, in my opinion, does not apply to questions in any sense.

So what if we loosened the vote lock timeout on questions? Upvoting a question because it seems interesting, thinking about an answer for 5 minutes and then realizing you don't even understand the question (purely because it's more vague than it seemed at first, not because of a lack of technical competence), seems something that could happen more often.

If not possible, I at least would like to know why this vote locking is as it is on questions.

1 Answer 1


I am sorry to say but it seems to me you might be voting too fast or too easy.

When you don't fully understand the question of it was unclear on a second look, you need to do better on your first look.

Voting, either up or down, should be done on the whole post. Not just on the first thought of a question being nice or stupid.

And you are right, sometimes we vote wrong, but in those cases, the community will often correct our mistakes.

  • You're right, voting too easily is the primary problem
    – MarioDS
    Jun 19, 2014 at 22:03
  • That is not what the community is for. It is widely told amongst the "elite" on SE that up-/down-voting is not meant to "correct" mistakes or to give any sort of "valid" measure. -Not My Words/Beliefs Jun 19, 2014 at 22:50
  • 1
    "voting too fast or too easy" Great. Now that I realize how I voted wrong, I'll just undo it…
    – bjb568
    Jun 20, 2014 at 3:13
  • @bjb568: Then you have about 4.55 minutes to undo ;) Jun 20, 2014 at 8:35
  • @agentprovocateur: I didn't say the community is there to correct our mistakes, but as a community, we make the decision. An individual is only a small part of it, and if that person does wrong, the net effect shouldn't be too high. Jun 20, 2014 at 8:36
  • 1
    @PatrickHofman I completely agree with you, but having made the same kinds of "assumptions" before and then having other members put me down for thinking those things makes me want to propagate the fact that a lot of the high-reppers/active members on SE would tell you that you are wrong to think so and that you should not think along those lines. Jun 20, 2014 at 20:32
  • @agentprovocateur: thanks for telling me. I will take this in consideration with my future comments! Jun 20, 2014 at 20:43

You must log in to answer this question.

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