40

This post is a request to re-consider the question "Please enable low-rep users to easily breakout up and down votes on their own questions", which was declined in 2010. This is not a duplicate post.

This is a request to allow new users to view the breakdown of up- and down-votes on their own questions and answers. Normally this is a privilege earned at 1000 reputation, but for your own posts, this information is already available by searching through your reputation history for a post. This request simply seeks to enable the break-out feature so that new users can easily see the voting record of their posts.

This is very useful, as it helps new users (or users new to a particular site) more easily see how their posts are being received by the community. If I see a +2 on a post, I interpret that as meaning my post was alright, and it probably hasn't gotten a lot of attention. If I see that it's +4/-2, then it tells me that while some people like it, there's some that see something actively wrong with it, so I may want to consider fixing it. At one point after this question was first posted it had a net score of 0, which was actually +5/-5. That is the difference between a question that hasn't been seen and a question that is somewhat contentious.

When this feature was previously requested, two employees responded. The first employee response was that it sounded like a reasonable request, and he agreed that it would benefit new users. Given that this privilege was initially created for database performance reasons, he also agreed that the extra load for this would be fairly negligible.

Jeff Atwood responded by marking the post , and gave the reason of "I still think it's an ability you should earn," which in my opinion is not really an explanation at all. Additionally, he is no longer a member of SE staff, while the employee who would have approved the feature request still is.

Given that it has been 9 years since the initial request, and that there were initially two conflicting responses, I would like to request that this feature be re-considered.

A secondary question to consider, is this privilege even necessary anymore? As described in one of the linked answers, the main purpose of this privilege was to help moderate additional load on the server. Given that it has been 10 years since it was initially required, I would assume that SE's server technology has improved since then. Has it improved enough that the servers could now sustain the additional load from allowing all users to break-out vote counts? I don't have enough technical or inside knowledge to understand how this all works though, so this is an honest question. If the primary reasoning is obsolete, I would also propose enabling this privilege for everyone, across all SE sites.

  • 2
    Anyone can already see the up/down votes in the timeline, there's even a userscript: stackapps.com/questions/3082/view-vote-totals-without-1000-rep – Shadow The Dragon Wizard May 13 at 14:03
  • 2
    Jeff wasn't a moderator; he was a co-founder. At the time, his opinion held greater weight than anyone else. I don't mind trying to revisit it, but I'm not seeing why the breakout will be that useful; they see the net, which already tells them how their post is being received. – fbueckert May 13 at 14:05
  • 20
    @fbueckert If I see a +2 on a post, I interpret that as meaning my post was alright, and it probably hasn't gotten a lot of attention. If I see that it's +4/-2, then it tells me that while some people like it, there's some that see something actively wrong with it, so I may want to consider fixing it. On this question right now, there's a net score of 0, but I know from my notifications that it's actually +2/-2, which is the difference between a question that hasn't been seen and a question that is somewhat contentious. – David K May 13 at 14:20
  • 4
    @ShadowWizard The timeline summarizes votes for a certain time period. For example, the timeline for this post just says it has a net score of -1 for the day, when I know it's actually +2/-3. Additionally, not all users are able to, or know how to use userscripts. I am on a work computer, and I can't install Chrome extensions. Other types of userscripts are not something I would have the knowledge to be able to use easily. Part of this is that the functionality already exists in SE, it would just need to be enabled for certain conditions. – David K May 13 at 14:24
  • 5
    Heh, turns out the timeline for users with 1k rep show the split, while he timeline for <1k users isn't. Didn't know it, sorry. So yeah, the userscript which reads from API is the only option and while I agree it's not ideal, it's still a way to see the vote split, and I doubt SE will change this feature any time soon. (More due to lack of time/resources, not because it's not a good or popular idea) – Shadow The Dragon Wizard May 13 at 14:47
  • 1
    ...and if the reason is for database performance reasons, the client-side code similar to that found in the user script should be served to new users, while 1k+ users get the server-side code. (A similar thing is done for the inline editor; only 2k+ users get that while lower-rep users editing their own posts don't.) (cc @forest) – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog May 13 at 23:23
  • 1
    @Shadow The old timeline before it was revamped did show it to <1k users, so that's why you may find some old posts floating around claiming that they can see it there. – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog May 13 at 23:24
  • @Sonic oh, thanks. – Shadow The Dragon Wizard May 14 at 6:35
  • @DavidK If it's your post, you would have received notifications for every single up/down vote – Voldemort's Wrath May 28 at 3:25
  • 1
    @INTERESTING You're right, and I can see individual up/down votes in my reputation history too, but that's part of the point. This information is already available to me, but in order to find it I have to dig through my reputation history and manually count up every vote for that particular question, which is especially hard if I have multiple posts active at a time. All I'm suggesting is making this information more easily accessible by enabling a feature which is already available to a large portion of users. – David K May 28 at 12:02

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .