Recent posts about bumping questions by Community ♦ led me to the question:

Should questions with 0 score answers be in the Unanswered list, if those answers have a non-zero count of votes?

My thoughts is we need to distinguish posts with no upvotes ever and posts with votes and a net score of 0. E.g. the reason to bump a question is to give votes for an answer according to this post (emphasis is mine):

the intent here is to resurface questions that someone has attempted to answer, but which haven't yet attracted any votes to either confirm the usefulness or decry the worthlessness of the answer(s) that've been posted

But currently the decision is made on the basis of total score only.

1 Answer 1


Whichever way you look at it, posts with a score of 0 need looking at again.

Answers with no votes at all have either been completely overlooked or are so mediocre that no one bothered to pay them much attention. Answers with a net score of 0 at least lack consensus or with higher numbers of votes can be controversial.

In the case of "unanswered" questions, it starts to make much more sense if you think of it as "not sufficiently answered" instead of "no answers posted".

As for distinguishing zero-voted and zero-scored answers, I don't see the benefit. There are so many question lists as it is, splitting unanswered questions in to questions with zero-scored answers and questions with zero-voted answers is just adding noise and confusion to an already overly busy question navigation for very little gain.

You must log in to answer this question.

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