I have notice two issues with the reputation graph:

1: This user has a higher score on the graph than in reality

I happened to notice this user profile where the user's graph reputation does not match their actual reputation. The person in question was hit by a -100 penalty for an offensive answer a while back, but the graph doesn't reflect that. I thought it just didn't update when I noticed this at the time, but the person has since gained and lost reputation and at all times the graph was +100 of their actual reputation. It seems, based on Shadow Wizard's comment that this is because the reputation change is non-public. OK, fair enough...

This old question, which was marked as , noticed a similar phenomenon for placed DVs. This prompted me to examine graphs more carefully. It seems that this hidden -1 has been updated, as I checked several users and did not find any others that had lower actual reputation than graph reputation, so . (Since the number of DVs placed is public, I can be reasonable sure that these users have placed -1 rep DVs, although strictly speaking they could be 100% question DVs.)

2: Some users have a lower score on the graph than in reality

I did, however, find many users where the graph says their reputation is much lower than it actually is. Perhaps that is from deleted downvotes turning into hidden +1s, but those should be balanced by hidden -1s, so its not clear what happened. Seems there is some error in the logic - maybe the -1s do affect the graph now as per the , but the corresponding +1s don't? Whatever the case, I can't imagine it is intentional.

Edit: I went back to find some examples today & didn't find any. I think the issue has been resolved - either it was a caching issue or a change was made to the code after this post.

  • The graph is showing only changes that are public. You won't see that -100 anywhere in the user profile. Commented Dec 22, 2015 at 21:22
  • @ShadowWizard The graph shows reputation as 105, which is inaccurate. Is that really superior to showing when the drop occurred? The graph does not itself state the reason, after all.
    – ThaddeusB
    Commented Dec 22, 2015 at 21:23
  • Well, see in the dupe - those who can see the private rep changes do see correct graph. Still not sure why it's tagged as completed though Commented Dec 22, 2015 at 21:27
  • @ShadowWizard See updated question - something is not right, although it is unclear what exactly.
    – ThaddeusB
    Commented Dec 22, 2015 at 21:42
  • 1
    huh. I have a suspicion that what @Oded did was to make everyone see the same graph, with lower numbers, even the user viewing own profile and moderators. But since I'm not sure anymore, better wait for some official answer here. :) Commented Dec 23, 2015 at 7:12
  • Um close voters, did you actually read my question? I linked to the "duplicate" in my question and clearly described how it is not the same thing.
    – ThaddeusB
    Commented Dec 24, 2015 at 15:12
  • This appears to have the same core issue. Maybe Oded marked it completed by mistake. If he won't respond soon (1-2 days, I've also flagged the question) I will vote to reopen this one as a new bug Commented Dec 24, 2015 at 15:14

1 Answer 1


I'm confident that you're right about this question not being an exact duplicate of Where did this user's rep go? (which I will refer to as "the related question" from here on out), so I've reopened this, but I remain somewhat confused about exactly what you're asking.

I would summarize this question as "a user's reputation graph shows higher value (101) than the total reputation display to its left (1)." I would summarize the related question as "a user's rep graph shows a higher value (146) than the total rep number (143)" with the given answer being "downvotes don't show up on the graph."

The first thing that confuses me is that you call this opposite behavior, but it looks the same to me. Both questions seem to be about graphs displaying higher values than the numeric totals to their left. The second thing that confuses me is where you're getting the number 105 from. A third thing that confuses me is what you mean by hidden +1s being balanced out by hidden -1s.

Leaving those points of confusion open, I think the answer to your specific question is something you already addressed. You claimed that the user in question had a validated offensive flag on a post. Those carry 100-point rep penalties, and such penalties are hidden from the public. That would make this both not a duplicate and make everything add up correctly.

Also, while I was looking into this, I noticed that the answer given at the related question does not seem to be accurate (though it may have been at the time it was written). I am able to see individual -1 reputation drops on the linked rep graph right now (although they still do not show up in the detailed timeline). I was viewing both profiles in an incognito window, so I'm not seeing weird mod-only versions of the graph.

  • If I've missed or misunderstood something (which seems likely) then please let me know what it is and I'll do my best to update.
    – Pops
    Commented Dec 30, 2015 at 4:14
  • Thanks for reopening. I have edited the question to make it clearer (see issue 2). However, it seems to have been resolved now... Also, I think the -1 thing was probably removed after that question as per the "status-completed," so that would explain the discrepancy between the answer and what can be seen now.
    – ThaddeusB
    Commented Dec 30, 2015 at 4:42
  • 1
    Just bumped into this question and answer again after seeing this new report. Has Oded really fixed anything? If not, can you please remove the status-completed from the other linked report? (better late than never... ;)) Commented Aug 29, 2016 at 15:00

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