Meta Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for meta-discussion of the Stack Exchange family of Q&A websites. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I understand why votes are anonymous, and don't believe anyone should see who downvoted a particular post.
But, at the same time, SO is a social media site, so not knowing who upvoted you dampens the network effect.
I suppose I'm writing because interaction without upvotes has made little paranoid right now. It'd be nice to know who thinks you're smart.
On the other hand, people might hold it against others who interact but don't upvote.
I can see where some of your confusion about what the Stack Exchange model is comes from. SE does rather prominently display usernames, reputation levels, and badge counts below each post. We also allow users to customize their profile's about me as much as they like. However, as others have said fairly frequently in the comments... Stack Exchange isn't a social media network. StackExchange.com's about page quite clearly indicates the stated goal of the network:
Stack Overflow and the Stack Exchange network help people find the answers they need, when they need them.
That's the goal! All of Stack Exchange's sites are about getting folks the answers they need, when they need them, and continuing to provide a large repository of knowledge, in Q&A format, for future visitors. Some sites, like Code Golf, are a little bit different, but the core concept of "Ask a question, get an answer" is the same.
Let's move a bit beyond that, though. Voting is extremely important to the Stack Exchange model, but it's not, and has never, been about whose content you vote on. It has always been about what content you vote on. From the help center article on the "Voting corrected" reputation change reason:
always remember to vote for the post, not the person who wrote it.
Voting is the most powerful moderation tool we have, requiring very little reputation on Stack Exchange sites, because it allows you to help indicate what content is useful or not useful. Those votes will last for the foreseeable future, and when many users vote on a particular post, all future visitors will see how useful others found that post to be. The side effect of voting is that it affects reputation and therefore privileges, but reputation gain is a reward for posting useful content.
From your feature request:
I suppose I'm writing because interaction without upvotes has made little paranoid right now. It'd be nice to know who thinks you're smart.
I, and I hope others, don't attach any personal feeling to votes I cast. If I upvote a post of yours, I do so because I find it useful to the site. I'll sometimes even upvote posts that I disagree with, but still find useful, because I know that indicating that the content is useful is important to site health.
My recommendation to you is not to worry about the users who vote for your posts, and worry more about continuing to post good content. You didn't get well over 750 reputation (at the time of writing) on Stack Overflow by posting useless content, you got there by posting content that will hopefully last for years. It's that shared mindset that makes this site the library of knowledge that it is, and will hopefully continue to be for years to come.
Social media sites tend to devolve into cabals and knowing your upvotees would greatly accentuate this. I would even argue that SO is already bad enough in this sense, so we probably shouldn't make it worse.
