I have seen many simple questions (and even answers) with a very large amount of up-votes. Is it a good idea to give so much reputation just for a very simple question or answer which is just because it is a common request of people who search the web for it (and the question/answer author is one who just posted it sooner than other ones)?

As an example, consider this simple (one line) question on Stack Overflow:

Q: How do I redirect to another page? link => 6041 up-votes!

A: window.location.replace(...), with a little more explanation link => 10008 up-votes!

Also consider a 10 points gain for each up-vote! it could theoretically give authors 30k and 100k reputation! (If distributed per different days in 2 years, but, anyway they will produce a very large rep despite the per day limit.)

What is wrong with this? I agree that the up-votes should be saved in the system and also shown for each post (to show how popular the question/answer is), but the reputation assigned to the user can be controlled such that they don't get unnecessary points which other users should try hard to achieve.

So, to improve the reputation system, I think there must be some limits for the total reputation one user can get from each question (or answer), or some weight factor for votes higher than some limit.

Consider this with the fact that many good technical questions and answers provide a very low reputation gain (e.g., +15 for accepted answer or if you have chance for 10 upvotes: 10*10 = 100), or consider many hard questions suggest a bounty worth about +50 or +200 rep. How could we compare them?!

As I already mentioned, I know there is a limit of 200 rep for each user per day. I think its not enough to control the issue as I've explained above.

I don't say we should distinguish simple and non-simple q/a. I think that a limitation or weight on reputation per post will improve the meaning of the reputation system, better than what is now in place.

  • 1
    I don't see that problem it is causing, what do you think? FGITW has always been one concern but the voting depends on whether the Q/A is useful, if it is so, I don't see any reason to put a limit to it. – SouravGhosh Jan 31 '17 at 11:47
  • @PatrickHofman not a dupe, that other one is asking to cap the total reputation from asking questions, same way rep from suggesting edits is capped at 1000. This one here asks to limit the amount of reputation one can gain for a single post. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jan 31 '17 at 11:49
  • @gnat no. The other one is purely a discussion calling for ideas. This one here is a clear feature request, with a very specfic request. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jan 31 '17 at 12:08
  • @S.Serp read my comment to gnat to understand the difference. (And yes, I did upvote the discussion and downvoted this.) – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jan 31 '17 at 12:09

You are mixing two things: the quality of the post and the usefulness of it to other people.

If a lot of users are helped by a simple question or answer, they will show their appreciation by upvoting it, just as they are intended to do. A high-quality post that isn't useful (to a lot of people) will not earn that much reputation, just because it is not that useful.

Capping the reputation gained will not fix any problem. It will just remove the incentive for users to keep updating their posts since there is nothing to gain any more.

| improve this answer | |
  • to motivate for updating, we can use a weight factor which decrease the +10 points for each upvote after some limit – S.Serpooshan Jan 31 '17 at 12:01
  • But why? Are those posts less useful over time then? – Patrick Hofman Jan 31 '17 at 12:11
  • 1
    not, because this improves the rep system to better distinguish users.. – S.Serpooshan Jan 31 '17 at 12:15

I saw many SIMPLE Questions

OK. Suppose that's true, and people do get thousands of reputation from posting trivial and simple answers, that they spent only few minutes on writing.

How can you distinguish a simple question from a non-simple question? Who will judge? What metrics will you use? Hint: you can't really do that.

Upvote means a person found this useful. This is reason enough to award the one writing the post, be it question or answer, simple or complicated. It doesn't matter.

| improve this answer | |
  • i don't say to distinguish simple and non-simple q/a, but limit the rep points any user gets from single post. Also upvote should be saved/shown for posts but it is not necessary to give huge reps for it – S.Serpooshan Jan 31 '17 at 11:59
  • 1
    @S.Serp so it will be unfair towards those who spend hours on writing answers to complicated questions, don't you think? – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jan 31 '17 at 11:59
  • i think that limitation or weight tuning will improve the meaning of reputation system, better than what which is now in place – S.Serpooshan Jan 31 '17 at 12:04

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