The description currently reads:

Zero score accepted answers: more than 10 and 25% of total.

The English sentence is really awkward and ambiguous: exactly 25%? >= 25%? <= 25%? it doesn't say (but the correct answer is >= 25%).

Besides that, I think requiring that at least 25% of your total answers should have no votes makes no sense.

Almost all the badges we have (if not all) are there to encourage good behavior. However if I want to get this badge I will have to intentionally try not to get my answers upvoted and the more helpful I was the more difficult it will be. For someone like Jon Skeet, getting this badge will be impossible because he will have to post more than 15,000 extra answers - and all of them would have to be accepted and not upvoted.

This seems a bit backwards to me. However without the 25% requirement (that no one asked for in the proposal thread) this badge makes sense since it encourages answering very difficult and obscure questions, while still being able to contribute to "normal" questions without jeopardizing your work on this badge.

And please change the wording to something more natural:

Posted at least X answers which have been accepted but not upvoted.

Answering part of waffles' answer (his full answer is right below, I accepted it so it shows up to the top):

Take david kanarek for example, he posts lots of answers in the iPhone tag, for example this one, a correct technical answer for a complex iPhone issue. The thing is, for some reason people do not upvote this stuff. Perhaps the iPhone crowd did not discover upvote button, perhaps its the low views, who knows. What we do know is that we want David to keep on contributing to Stack Overflow, so we give him a badge for his efforts.

Well, let's take other examples. I'll take the 3 last users who got awarded the badge: Murph, invertedSpear, hunter.


  • Top tags: C#, asp.net, .net, sql-server, sql. They don't really look like unknown and obscure tags.. In fact they are the post popular!
  • Now, some examples of accepted answers with zero votes. One, two, three, four.. Most of them are very short and just contain a link. In many cases there are other upvoted answers (but the OP accepted his). Honestly, they don't seem great answers. Murph if you are reading this sorry, I just picked your name randomly - nothing personal - but I wouldn't call him an "unsung hero".



  • asp.net, C#, jquery, asp.net-mvc, javascript. Again, popular tags.
  • Answers: one, two, three, four.. Again, all seem very "average" answers.

The concept here is to give these "poor users" that participate in tags that are not wildly followed or upvoted or happen to answer less popular questions some extra incentive to keep on making Stack Overflow better.

Did you look at the data before stating this? I manually went through the vast majority of the user profiles who got the badge. Around 75% of them (and that's being conservative, it's probably more) are active only in very popular tags such as c#.

This is not meant to be another badge amongst the 1400 badges Jon Skeet already has, its about giving these users that contribute in a less popular way an incentive to keep contributing.

But it's based on luck, it's not something you can actually work towards. You just have to be lucky, and if you don't get it by the time you have - let's say - 5,000 rep, you will never able to get it. If it's a lottery that you can't even keep participating in after a certain point it doesn't encourage any behavior.

Yes, there are other very luck based badges, but you can keep working towards them until you eventually obtain them. You can't in this case.

  • 14
    One more thing unclear is 25% of total accepted answers or total answers given? – Himadri Jul 12 '10 at 9:52
  • 15
    Also, a little rant: this has happened before (cough -4 rep for downvotes cough) but it really bothers me that we discuss very extensively something, and we all strongly agree with the original proposal (it has over 100 votes) and then suddenly it gets implemented in a different way that never came up during the discussion, without consulting the community first (or consulting it and then ignoring the feedback, cough -4 rep for downvotes cough). I believe this was done in order to justify it being a gold badge, but the word "gold" appears only in 1 comment. – Thomas Bonini Jul 12 '10 at 9:59
  • 5
    Jon Skeet, an unsung hero? Talk about an oxymoron ;) This badge is designed for high-end users to never have it. – VonC Jul 12 '10 at 10:59
  • 4
    @himadri it is 25% of your accepted answers. – Amarghosh Jul 12 '10 at 12:09
  • 3
    @VonC: I realize that; I'm saying that it's designed wrong, because badges should 1) encourage good behavior 2) be obtainable by everyone willing to put in the effort. Look at SO at the people who got it. You'll notice that most of them in their profile have c#, c++, php and other very popular tags as their top tags. They got the badge because 1) They were lucky 2) They are new users 3) Their answers weren't good (in fact, in many cases there were other answers with upvotes that were not accepted). – Thomas Bonini Jul 12 '10 at 12:30
  • 2
    @Kop: I wish I could upvote again after your edit :-) – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 12:59
  • @Kop: I agree (and upvoted your question) It was just the "Jon Skeet" part which seems strange to me. – VonC Jul 12 '10 at 13:03
  • Well something changed, I just got both the unsung hero and tireless badges... and I didn't even know about them :P – Mottie Jul 12 '10 at 13:12
  • How about lowering the % to say 10 or 15 and increasing the cutoff to a more realistic (golden) 40 or 50? I must add that though I would get both the badges with this criteria, that's not the sole reason behind this proposal ;) – Amarghosh Jul 12 '10 at 13:45
  • @VonC - exactly: Jon Skeet is definitely a sung hero. :) – GalacticCowboy Jul 12 '10 at 15:02
  • It is a bit strange if the questioner himself does not give an upvote as a thanks, I would say. – user148676 Jul 12 '10 at 17:10
  • 2
    @George: It's as Andy says, a lot of users that I've answered questions for only have 1-11 rep, so I've got quite a lot of 0 vote accepted answers. Just start answering questions that contain some kind of VB in the tag and you can quickly get a lot of those. – ho1 Jul 12 '10 at 20:19
  • 2
    Well... firstly I'm happy to accept that I ain't the target receipient - so far as I can see in most cases my answers aren't necessarily "great" but they do tend to be good/right answers (and, strangely, some are definitely - I think - "better" than upvoted answers). I've commented elsewhere that I don't think I deal with obscure questions often however the questions still need answering... – Murph Jul 12 '10 at 22:15
  • 3
    I am not against tweaking parameters to account for any negative outliers, stuff like change zero score to zero votes is inline, and perhaps give it out historically. What I am against is making this a badge that is obtainable by our sung heros such as Jon Skeet / Eric Lippert and so on ... If you think we need a new badge for participation in less popular tags, I'm totally for it, but its a new badge, post a separate request on it. – waffles Jul 12 '10 at 23:10
  • 1
    @waffles, I agree, @hunter does seem like a good candidate for the badge. He has a lot of zero-score accepted answers that he put effort into. Still, the annoying side effect of this badge is that it also rewards poorly written answers that don't deserve upvotes. – Andy E Jul 13 '10 at 8:42

I stand behind this decision.

First lets look at the definition for unsung hero:

a person who makes a substantive yet unrecognized contribution; a person whose bravery is unknown or unacknowledged

from dictionary.com

I agree that Jon / Marc and Eric may make substantive unrecognized contributions at times, but their "bravery" is very acknowledged. They should not be getting this badge.

If you think there needs to be particular tweaks to this badge, post separate requests, with backing data, one per request. Some reasonable ones I heard are giving it out retrospectively, or changing zero score to zero votes. But before doing this I need to look at backing data.

If you think there needs to be a new badge that acknowledges participation in obscure tags, I'm totally for it, but this should be a new badge that we need to think out. Post a separate meta proposal on it.

The concept here is encourage a behavior that is not normally encouraged using our reputation system. It is not meant to be a badge that is easily achievable nor is it meant to be a badge that everybody wants to get.

The concept here is to give these "poor users" that participate in tags that are not wildly followed or upvoted or happen to answer less popular questions some extra incentive to keep on making Stack Overflow better.

Take david kanarek for example, he posts lots of answers in the iPhone tag, for example this one, a correct technical answer for a complex iPhone issue. The thing is, for some reason people do not upvote this stuff. Perhaps the iPhone crowd did not discover upvote button, perhaps its the low views, who knows. What we do know is that we want David to keep on contributing to Stack Overflow, so we give him a badge for his efforts.

This is not meant to be another badge amongst the 1400 badges Jon Skeet already has, its about giving these users that contribute in a less popular way an incentive to keep contributing.

  • Also, case in point, if we went by your definition Jeff would be the only one to get an unsung hero badge on meta, do you thing that is fair? I'm happy that there are no unsung heros here. – waffles Jul 12 '10 at 10:47
  • 1
    The reason nobody gets this on meta is cause people are vote happy here, there is no crazy nitch on meta that is unwatched and collecting dust, accepted answers almost always tend to have a score larger than 1. – waffles Jul 12 '10 at 10:48
  • 1
    I think the biggest problem people have here is that this badge has only just been introduced. For many people to actively try and attain the badge now we'd have to concentrate solely on answering obscure questions and hoping the accepting user doesn't have the rep to upvote also. On the other hand, if those badges had been there from the start we might have earned it at some point. FWIW, I don't think there's a problem having a percentage, I just think a better balance is required so that you can't get this badge on your 40th accept. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 10:59
  • 7
    Also, contrasting your sampled user, david kanarek, take a look at the suspended Azeem.Butt. Most of his zero-score answers are one liners or have an equal number of upvotes and downvotes. Hardly heroic. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 11:06
  • 5
    @Andy that can be tweaked ... Im not against changing it to require zero votes as opposed to zero score – waffles Jul 12 '10 at 11:22
  • 3
    It's like some people are crying foul because they don't get to get another badge that they fall outside the requirements of. – random Jul 12 '10 at 12:14
  • 5
    @waffles: There's still a problem though. As an active user, I could be unsung in a certain tag whilst also being active in a popular tag. I'll never gain either badge because questions and votes in popular tags are a dime a dozen yet I never get any recognition for the answers I give in the obscure tags because they'll never make up that required percentage of the total answers I give. The badge in its current state promotes reduced participation in popular tags, rather than increased participation in rare tags. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 12:20
  • 8
    @random: it just doesn't seem right that a badge should be more or less unattainable to certain users. Sure, I can't get the beta badge and that's fine, but my level of participation in the site means I'll never be eligible for Tireless/Unsung Hero, even if my participation in obscure questions is the same as that of an "unsung hero". – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 12:27
  • 8
    "for many people to actively try and attain the badge now we'd have to concentrate solely on answering obscure questions" which is EXACTLY THE INTENT OF THE BADGE. QED. – Jeff Atwood Jul 12 '10 at 16:17
  • 6
    @Jeff: but as established users it's significantly more difficult to do that and you're effectively discouraging those users from participating in the popular tags. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 16:33
  • 11
    @Jeff: So you want to discourage people from answering non-obscure questions? A badge that kicks in with a certain number of accepted answers to obscure questions encourages people to answer obscure questions. Adding the percentage requirement discourages people from answering non-obscure questions, and doesn't drive any behavior from our more valuable contributors, who'll never get that badge. – David Thornley Jul 12 '10 at 17:03
  • 2
    "So you want to discourage people from answering non-obscure questions?" yes -- because there are more than enough folks already answering the popular stuff! That's why it's popular. The unpopular, obscure stuff needs more people looking at it. – Jeff Atwood Jul 12 '10 at 21:40
  • 3
    Maybe you should add 1 vote questions in too? (The Question asker will often vote up and accept) But, I don't think the percentage should be lifted. @jeff – jjnguy Jul 12 '10 at 21:57
  • 3
    @Jeff: Why do you think that the badge would not work (or would be less effective) if there was no ratio imposed? – Daniel Vassallo Jul 12 '10 at 22:59
  • 1
    @Daniel if we changed it not to impose the ratio, it would not detect unsung heros, instead it would pile on another badge to all those users that answer tons of questions – waffles Jul 12 '10 at 23:18

EDIT Normally I put my edits at the end, but this is important enough.

This badge will not accomplish it's purpose: Encouraging users to participate in low-view tags.

  • Most pre-existing users cannot get this, they are burdened by all their valid contributions.

  • Pre-existing users who already do this will get this badge. But then we are rewarding behaviour which already occurs. This won't encourage more users to join, because the only ones who could get the badge, will already have it.

  • New users can "easily" (with hard work) get this badge, if they know about it. But if they do not know about this badge, then it is likely that they will end up in one of the most common tags, and then only see the badge later, once it is too late for them to get it.

If you look carefully, you'll notice that none of those situation provide a benefit to the askers of low-interest questions. They still have the same (very small) pool of answerers. There is still no incentive for the users of of high-rep tags to switch.

Now onto the original response:

This is an extended reply to Waffles, as his is the official response on this issue.

The concept here is encourage a behavior that is not normally encouraged using our reputation system.

This is an absolutely critical thing. I completely agree that the behaviour that it is designed to encourage is something that we want to encourage.

The concept here is to give these "poor users" that participate in tags that are not wildly followed or upvoted or happen to answer less popular questions some extra incentive to keep on making Stack Overflow better.

However, it was done backwards. Instead of having Robert, Jeff or Joel post a meta-question along the theme "How do we encourage more activity in low-reputation tags", they latched onto a badge proposal. Rather than designing a solution to a problem, they grabbed a "solution" and tried to back-engineer it towards the problem.

This is not meant to be another badge amongst the 1400 badges Jon Skeet already has, its about giving these users that contribute in a less popular way an incentive to keep contributing.

We already have the [Necromancer] badge. The [Necromancer] badge is far superior for this one overarching reason: You are NOT punished for previous behaviour.

This is why the [Electorate], [Unsung Hero] and [Tireless] badge are actually terrible. They reward a certain type of behaviour at the expense of another. For [Unsung Hero] it means that I am no longer allowed to work in high profile tags.

It is rewarding people who have blinders on. It does not encourage high-profile users to help out the low view areas, it rewards people who are already behaving that way.


If you want actionable suggestions for other badges.

  • [Elbow Grease]: Answer with +3 on a question with < 100 views
  • [In The Trenches]: 20 answers with +3 on questions with < 100 views
  • [Archaeologist]: Answered a question more than 100 days old with more than +3 (on answer)
  • [Curator]: Answered 20 questions more than 100 days old with more than +3 (on answer)
  • [Shaman?]: Accepted Answer on 20 questions not in the top 50 tags.
  • [Pilgrimage]: Accepted Answer on 50 questions not in the top 50 tags.

Now, if any of these were suggested individually as badges, I'd be among the first to find flaw (I'm unceasingly negative). But at least there would be a discussion with possibility for improvements.

  • 6
    Not getting a badge shouldn't be considered as punishment. – random Jul 12 '10 at 13:42
  • 4
    @Random: When you say "you must be this tall to ride" you are 'punishing' those who are too short. Why is this a punishment? Because you are excluding them from a reward. If you reward every kid in the class except one, what is that one to think? – devinb Jul 12 '10 at 13:49
  • +1, this expands on the issues I raised in my replies to waffle's answer. I wish I could add another +1 for "I'm unceasingly negative", because I had noticed and it's great that you don't mind admitting it ;-) – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 14:10
  • 1
    You're taking this a little too far. "no longer allowed" is over the top. Sure, they're shiny, and you got to get them all, but you can just look at the badge and say meh. – Kobi Jul 12 '10 at 14:11
  • 7
    @Kobi: If you're going to disregard the badges, then this entire discussion is purposeless. My response implicitly assumes that badges have a behavioural effect because if they don't, then why have them at all? – devinb Jul 12 '10 at 14:31
  • 1
    Another odd point - if the badge favors new users, maybe veteran users qualified to it at some point, when they were new? I certainly got less upvotes when I were a new user. – Kobi Jul 12 '10 at 14:47
  • 2
    "For [Unsung Hero] it means that I am no longer allowed to work in high profile tags." Some badges are about making meaningful choices. You want to have every single badge? that's your goal? – Jeff Atwood Jul 12 '10 at 16:23
  • 8
    @Jeff: I find it interesting that you've structured your awards in such a way that I have to choose between positive behaviours. Shouldn't the awards be structured in such a way that I can be rewarded for both? – devinb Jul 12 '10 at 17:12
  • 4
    This post is pretty insightful. Ratio-based achievements in a linearly progressive system that has no ceiling just don't make a lot of sense. – womp Jul 12 '10 at 23:02
  • +1 for the list of badge suggestions; not necessarily for the rest of the post. – Mark Hurd Jun 21 '13 at 5:36

For me, the Real "Unsung Heroes" are somewhere in this set:

User Link                  Zero Score Answers Non Zero Score Answers Reputation 
-------------------------- ------------------ ---------------------- ---------- 
Hans Passant               224                1278                   69265      
CommonsWare                201                635                    33578      
Nick Craver                181                1182                   54208      
Darin Dimitrov             180                1165                   75062      
Pascal Thivent             177                1204                   72814      
marc_s                     173                1174                   72178      
BalusC                     156                1228                   65100      
tvanfosson                 148                1315                   113772     
Gumbo                      142                897                    72061      
Craig Stuntz               137                603                    37645      
AnthonyWJones              133                608                    43347      
John Saunders              127                578                    50794      
Marc Gravell               118                2242                   151137     
VonC                       114                1091                   87438      
SLaks                      111                1146                   62973      
bobince                    109                982                    70118      
Pekka                      106                914                    52537      
KennyTM                    104                722                    45356 

These folks have 100+ accepted answers with a zero score.


I regularly answer questions tagged google-maps on Stack Overflow. These questions do not attract a lot of views and upvotes, and when answers are upvoted, it is often the OP upvoting it while accepting it. With a low rate of upvotes, it is also very difficult to obtain the silver tag badge (relative to other popular tags).


The same thing happens when users regularly answer long and complicated questions that many others don't even bother to read, let alone verify and upvote the answers. I'm not surprised to see the names of a few brave heroes in the above list. Most of them are familiar names as @random noted below, but weren't they unsung on those 100+ unrecognized answers? Why does the ratio matter?

Shouldn't this badge encourage contribution to the situations mentioned above? Or did I totally misunderstand the motivation behind this badge?

  • 7
    Unsung means they shouldn't be names you're familiar with. Most of those names are very familiar/visible. – random Jul 12 '10 at 13:18
  • 6
    Yes but that is just because they have thousands of answers! – Jeff Atwood Jul 12 '10 at 13:21
  • Is this the equivalent of vuvuzelas? @jef – random Jul 12 '10 at 13:22
  • 2
    @random: Their bravery was unrecognized over 100 times. Doesn't that still qualify as unsung? – Daniel Vassallo Jul 12 '10 at 13:24
  • 17
    @Jeff. Why should we EVER EVER punish someone for contributing TOO STRONGLY to StackOverflow? That doesn't make any sense. We want to encourage users to look at low popularity tags. ALL users, not just the ones who aren't very good to start with. – devinb Jul 12 '10 at 13:31
  • 2
    @Daniel, @devinb: Errr... I agree? ;) Except it is not like the OP doesn't want to recognize anyone's bravery. They actually can't. See stackoverflow.com/questions/3223922/…: nobody look at it (no upvote) and the OP has only 8 rep: no upvote possible. – VonC Jul 12 '10 at 13:50
  • 5
    @VonC: Good point... In fact, when answering questions on non-popular topics from new users, it's very often that the questions are accepted with zero score... But wasn't the intention of this badge to motivate efforts such as these? – Daniel Vassallo Jul 12 '10 at 13:54
  • 2
    @devinb "the goal isn’t to be on Stack Overflow, but to generally do things that make you a better programmer. While that certainly includes the fractional time slices of questions and answers that programmers so generously contribute, it also means doing your job, and writing code! To the extent that Stack Overflow itself becomes the goal, we are failing you." blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/10/podcast-72 – Jeff Atwood Jul 12 '10 at 14:47
  • 7
    @Jeff: that's not relevant to the arguments people are making against the rules of the badge. Addicted new users spending all day, every day on SO could attain the badge just by posting mostly poor answers in popular tags. Some users could obtain the badge on their 40th accepted answer. It looks like the original idea most people had of the badge, which was to reward participation in tags that yield few votes, seems to have been warped during the implementation. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 15:32
  • 1
    @andye er.. by posting "mostly poor" answers that get accepted? I think what I'm hearing is mostly sour grapes at this point, not legitimate arguments. – Jeff Atwood Jul 12 '10 at 16:16
  • 7
    @Jeff: "poor" doesn't necessarily mean incorrect. Maybe you haven't read the thread thoroughly enough to see the legitimate complaints. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 16:19
  • 2
    @Daniel, yes that is the intention, its a consolation badge. I am totally for adding a badge for participating in less popular tags that higher rep users can achieve but that was not the intention here. – waffles Jul 13 '10 at 1:25
  • 1
    @Amarghosh, Having a badge that you can only earn as a new user to the site doesn't seem right. It certainly wouldn't seem very fair to the user that got his 50th zero-score accepted answer at 5001 rep. These users will eventually become 10k users too, and might even make it to the first page, which is what everyone seems to be forgetting. – Andy E Jul 13 '10 at 7:15
  • 2
    @Amarghosh: but that's even more of a point to retroactively apply the badge as if it were implemented from the start. I bet there's a lot of 10k+ users that weren't appreciated in their early days (I don't think I'm one of those people, btw). Also, I think the badge has missed its mark - it was intended to reward continuous posting in low-vote yielding tags, but it's ended up rewarding answers in popular tags that didn't deserve upvoting. – Andy E Jul 13 '10 at 8:29
  • 2
    The main problem I have is that, on the pages of users who've earned the badge I click on their 0 score accepted answers and they're single liners or links. A true unsung hero is someone who puts a lot of effort in, writing detailed, quality answers and getting no recognition for it. – Andy E Jul 13 '10 at 8:30

I agree. 25% is too much. But totally 10 is to easy for a gold badge. Maybe increase it to 25 or 50 zero scored accepted answers and drop the 25% of total requirement.

  • 1
    Yes, 10 is too easy for a gold badge. But 1) no one said it has to be a gold badge 2) the number can be tweaked at will, that's why I used X in the final description! – Thomas Bonini Jul 12 '10 at 9:51
  • 2
    @Kop: There is also a silver badge Tierless for this. – Jonas Jul 12 '10 at 9:58

It looks like these (Tireless/Unsung Hero) are not badges you should be striving to attain - they are awarded as a token of appreciation/inspiration/consolation to folks who are frustrated that their efforts go unnoticed by the community.

That said, I believe the cutoff of 10 for a gold badge is too low. 10 for the silver and 25 for gold would be fair enough.

And above all, the percentage requirement should be brought down to 17.08 aka 55/322 - I missed the silver version by 10 answers according to latest data dump ;)


25% seems far too high. The more questions you answer, the less likely it is that you will ever attain this badge. A good argument to this case is that nobody only one person over 10k has the badge on any of the trilogy sites:


Nobody has the badge at all on meta.

It's going to be very difficult for anyone with a lot of accepted answers and active in a popular tag to ever get this badge, it seems far more likely that you'd achieve it within the early stages of joining the sites, e.g. on your 10th answer ;-)

I think Sanoj has the right idea - 50 accepted answers with 0 score would be a lot tougher. It would certainly less obtainable to new users. If the percentage requirement has to stay, I think a better balance is needed.

EDIT: mostly because I'm bored of my work, I decided to do some jQuery work via Google Chrome's console and worked out that the average rep of users on SO with this badge is 2981.5968992248063 - not counting the suspended user with 1 rep.

  • Kind of an aside, but maybe these badges aren't enabled on Meta? I think the Generalist badge is disabled (either that, or it's broken, as it seems at least Jeff would have it by now). – Jon Seigel Jul 12 '10 at 10:43
  • 1
    @Jon: that's something that could be checked if the data explorer wasn't down. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 10:46
  • 2
    "A good argument to this case is that nobody only one person over 10k has the badge on any of the trilogy sites" - maybe those people over 10K are already sung heroes, and don't need an unsung hero badge. – ChrisW Jul 12 '10 at 10:47
  • 2
    @ChrisW: that's a good point, but my interpretation of the badge request was that you're "unsung" on those zero-scored answers. With enough involvement in the site, everybody will become "sung" sooner or later, but we won't revoke the badge then will we? – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 10:54
  • 1
    @Chris: "Unsung hero" is the name of the badge, it is supposed to reflect the function. If it doesn't, then the name should be changed, not the function. – devinb Jul 12 '10 at 17:42

I don't think the criteria are out of line.

What I think everyone is objecting to is the fact that the badge was recently introduced, and awarded based on current data, not retroactively.

It will be nearly impossible to get the badge now as a higher-rep user, while it is possible we would have gotten it at some point in the past.

If the badge is awarded to all users who would have qualified for it at the time, then I think that should make everyone happy. Even if you don't get the badge, that is a fair solution for everyone.

  • I'm assuming it was awarded based on current data, because awarding it retroactively is far more complicated to implement. – Jon Seigel Jul 12 '10 at 12:09
  • 6
    The outcry seems more like whinging about a badge they can't grind for. – random Jul 12 '10 at 12:15
  • Im not against adjusting for this, I doubt there will be a big change – waffles Jul 12 '10 at 12:46
  • 4
    @random: I disagree. At least, my "outcry" is that I could only attain this badge by grinding for it. Most other silver/gold badges are attainable through normal daily usage of the site. – Andy E Jul 12 '10 at 12:53
  • @Andy E's head I agree. That's how I got the Electorate badge also - by grinding for it, and for a similar reason: even if I voted for questions, to actually get it in a reasonable time I had to consciously slow down my ordinary voting on answers. – Daniel Daranas Aug 26 '10 at 9:27

I disagree - the 25% rate of unmarked questions is a GOOD starting point.

It is a gold badge to reward you when you answer the more obscure questions that don't get a lot (or any) upvotes, or you answer questions for people who have insufficient rep to upvote. Its payback for hanging out where the upvote fairies fear to tread.

My interpretation of the proposal was that it wasn't there to be earnt - in fact it may be almost impossible to get deliberately.

Personally I also think the minimum question limit is too low, it should be 20, 30, maybe even 40. Gold badges shouldn't be cheapened by just handing them out willy nilly.

Disclaimer: i have the silver version, i just missed out on the gold (roughly 23% ratio). Even so i think the gold is set too low, and i think the silver is set way too low (should probably be bronze).

  • It is a gold badge to reward you only if you answer the more obscure questions... ie. If you answer a lot of obscure questions, and other popular questions, the fairies still won't reward you :) – Daniel Vassallo Jul 12 '10 at 13:00
  • @Daniel For some odd reason, I was just rewarded this badge today and there was no change in my reputation. When looking over my answers, almost all of them are not in obscure questions/tags. – Mottie Jul 12 '10 at 13:59
  • @Daniel - why shouldn't i also answer more popular tagged questions? Why should i restrict myself to just the obscure ones? There are some badges here that i will never get but i don't get all upset about it. If no-one is there to answer the obscure questions then the site will morph into a place where only c#/wpf/sql/silverlight questions get answered, and most of the rep will go to the person who gets their answer in first (provided it is correct). Is that the sort of site you want to eventuate? – slugster Jul 14 '10 at 9:13
  • The problem is the I cannot see why it was chosen to encourage users to choose between two positive behaviours. – Daniel Vassallo Jul 14 '10 at 14:09

You must log in to answer this question.

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