While at least some answers from every question seem to have been up-voted as a "helpful" answer:

  • about 49% of questions have score of 0 or 1.
  • another 21% of questions have a score of 2.

Most questions seem to have an answer or two with score +5. Is it that we have a lot of fluff questions and not useful ones? Or perhaps it just seems more natural to vote for answers than questions? If we want the most useful info on Stack Overflow to filter to the top, how can this disparity be fixed?

I think this may cause real problems for people getting the badges which require +25 or +100 votes on questions.

I like a lot of the feedback I'm seeing. Two problems are highlighted:

  1. The work flow doesn't promote voting for questions the way it promotes voting for answers. One solution: when a user answers a question, the system should invite them to vote for the question. If someone cares enough to answer a question, then they care enough to vote for it as well.
  2. Users with less than 15 reputation cannot vote for questions or answers. Is this warranted? Maybe these users could provisionally vote for questions and answers and those ratings would only take effect when the user reaches 15 reputation?

All I ask is this. As you browse Stack Overflow, when you see a good question: vote for it.

If everyone does, then this problem will disappear.

  • 7
    Just commenting that as of 9/9/08 the stats have shifted slightly and more questions are being ranked. Now its ~46% ranked 0 or 1, and ~17% ranked 2.
    – Justin Standard
    Commented Sep 9, 2008 at 18:52
  • 64
    I think the real issue is that questions and answers are treated alike in the voting system. As a result, questions get compared to answered in terms of vote and most of the time, answers look more helpful and well crafted than questions. I believe the system should differentiate votes on questions and answers (I think Joel mentioned this idea in the latest podcast(#62))
    – mmx
    Commented Jul 25, 2009 at 16:10
  • 4
    Maybe the people answering the questions are ranking them - by not voting them up? Commented Oct 2, 2009 at 2:44
  • 44
    Perhaps because the overall quality of the questions are low? Commented Nov 25, 2009 at 19:42
  • 19
    There's also strange situations where a question gets more favorites than it does votes (serverfault.com/questions/3780/…). Are we seeing redundancy due to voting up a question and favoriting a question are basically saying the same thing?
    – Shane
    Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 21:56
  • 35
    I have favorited, but not upvoted, questions that I think are not great but want to revisit later. I have even favorited questions I have downvoted, or voted to close, because I want to see what happens to them. Commented May 7, 2011 at 1:00
  • 1
    @arch check these related feature request questions: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4719/add-answer-later-tab meta.stackexchange.com/questions/69346/…
    – Knu
    Commented May 23, 2011 at 21:17
  • I always vote for questions, relatively more than for answers, but there are more answers than questions so thats why I have more answer votes. On the other hand I always try to keep updating my formatting so that the question gets better and better like here: stackoverflow.com/questions/16605834/… and here: stackoverflow.com/questions/16586469/… but still questions won't get upvotes:( I don't see what I am doing wrong here
    – Nick N.
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 9:46
  • 4
    I think questions need to have two types of votes. One for how well the question is written (code examples, clarity etc). This could be moderated. The second rating would be for value and relevance of the question. Now some of the relevance will be related to the number of views (could be related to title keywords) but more importantly that a question has some value to other programmers. Commented Jan 5, 2014 at 0:50
  • 2
    I've seen some questions with huge amounts of upvotes and they are usually questions to a very common problem that has yet to be asked or questions that are very uncommon about a particular subject that the majority can participate in. There's also the idea that answers take more work than questions in general, and the merit reflects that? Just some psychological analysis of human nature in the matter. Commented Jan 24, 2014 at 19:53
  • 1
    "I think this may cause real problems for people getting the badges which require +25 or +100 votes on questions." Is that really such a significant problem that it requires a solution?
    – Pollyanna
    Commented Mar 27, 2014 at 21:03
  • 80% old questions ware having positive score where as upcoming questions are neither up voted nor down voted, take any immediate action to rate the questions as well as answers Commented Jul 30, 2014 at 18:59
  • 4
    My two cents: Many people are just quickly seeking answers. But I upvote good questions as well.
    – neverMind9
    Commented Oct 25, 2018 at 20:17
  • 3
    because most questions are garbage (without a stellar answer)
    – Kevin B
    Commented Jan 13, 2020 at 16:53
  • 1
    This is an important question and is still a problem – I got here wondering why posting an answer doesn't automatically upvote the question? Seems like a simple mechanic that would work: if it's worth answering the question is clearly valuable. Commented Apr 22, 2020 at 18:43

56 Answers 56


I would have up voted several things in the past 20 minutes if there wasn't a silly reputation restriction on up votes. I can understand down vote limits, and an can understand a probation period, but it shouldn't kick in automatically it should be applied when your reputation drops, not when you're first starting off.

Now the initial impression is "Why did I just register? I can't do anything." It will also lead to far more duplicate answers because I can't easily say "I agree with this existing answer." I either have to post my own 90% similar answer, or say "@johndoe I agree" which doesn't elevate the answer in the rankings, requires the reader to parse and scroll back to see what johndoe said, and gives johndoe no benefit from their good answer.

This post is a perfect example of this, lots of other people have said "Vote Up shouldn't be restricted" but I have no way to reinforce their point without you reading all this garbage I just wrote...


The answer ratings have a graphical interpretation. The little up-arrow pushes the answer up the score-scale, and thus up the page; and the down arrow pushes it down the score-scale, and thus down the page. That a question has a score of 20 vs 200 vs 2000 doesn't tell me anything, as there is no implied comparison with other questions. I have to think about the meaning of the question voting widget every time I see it, as it does not intuitively mean anything.

I would suggest that the question's rating (for whatever purposes that rating has) be inferred from the answer ratings. Maybe the question score could be the sum total of all answer votes.

Inferring from the number of answers is less attractive, as some answer sequences are actually conversation threads, and do not reflect on the quality of the question.

  • A conversation thread would have a higher total number of votes because of the higher number of posts.
    – Chris Huang-Leaver
    Commented Jan 1, 2009 at 3:32

One of the fundamental issues that doesn't seem to have been addressed seems to me to be pretty fundamental: There seem to be no incentive for upvoting questions, so why would I bother?

In practice, I do go out of my way to try and upvote questions, but I seem to be in the minority.

At first, I did get some value from upvoting because I could then find interesting questions again through my personal page (that's how I found myself behaving: "upvote = mark this question so I can find it again later"). Now that "favourites" have been enabled, I no longer even get this benefit.

So basically, the only motivation I now see for upvoting is some nebulous "do unto others" kind of philosophy.

That may suit me, but by embarking with the whole reputation system, stackoverflow has marked itself as a different beast. Live by the rep, die by the rep.

That's not a bad thing, just the way things are.

SO is a rep-based economy. Want people to upvote questions? Easy: attach some incentive to it.

  • 1
    What's the incentive in upvoting answers then? OPs question wasn't why people don't vote at all, it was why they vote more on answers than on questions... Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 15:50

Give a separate badge for rating questions.

  • 1
    We already have too many badges. This feels like pokemon.
    – Andrew
    Commented Dec 18, 2008 at 1:57
  • 3
    I remember this from so long ago! Looks like you took my advice.
    – BoltBait
    Commented Mar 22, 2010 at 0:28
  • we did, but there's still not enough voting on questions. meta.wordpress.stackexchange.com/questions/568/… Commented Apr 30, 2011 at 8:14
  • @Jeff: would a message asking for anyone taking the time to answer a question to consider voting (up or down) the question he/she is answering make sense? I usually upvote questions I am answering to (meta.stackexchange.com/questions/509/… , maybe not for the right reason, but still...)
    – VonC
    Commented Apr 30, 2011 at 8:38

I see a down vote as indication that the question is a "bad" question, rather than a "stupid" one. There are no stupid questions, as has been stated. However, there are bad questions --- insufficient information, poorly formulated, no attempt to solve the problem self, no research into possible solution, please do my homework for me, and so on. These type of questions are distinguishable (I believe) from those indicating that the questioner is struggling with the concepts and does need some help. A down vote prompts the questioner to put some effort into finding a solution and researching the problem a little before asking the community to bail him/her out.


This is being overthought.

I call Benford's Law on the voting distribution.

  • Does Benford’s Law explain why the voting distribution is different for questions and answers? Commented Mar 12, 2021 at 12:21

Sorry about the sad truth: I skip the question entirely and scroll straight down to the top answers. More often than not, I hit jackpot on first try, as the answer seems to address my question perfectly fine*.

It's a TL;DR feeling. Do you reread your Google/Bing search queries before you start scrolling down the results?

*Yes, on rare occasions I might check the question for some details just to verify if indeed it matches up to my issue.

  • 1
    When I land on a page because I've Googled a problem I'm having, absolutely this. Unlike you though that is not the only reason I land on pages. :) This is an interesting point because I guess most visitors fall into the same camp as you, and are thus more likely to do as you've described. I do find it particularly interesting though that your answer seems to pre-suppose that someone only ever lands on a page because they've been looking for a solution. Many people browse the front page throughout the day for curation purposes, and to look for things to answer (to contribute not just consume) Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 20:11

Couldn't it automatically infer the value of a question by other metrics like # of answers and # of up votes on answers, # of views, etc.

Answers that are voted up are usually deep answers, but they typically require a deep question. Don't they? Let's turn to the DB to find out.


From a design standpoint I reckon you should have the question rating on the browsing pages. It I don't like a question I'm not going to bother with opening it and then rating it. I'd rather have a "bury/promote" function in the question listings themselves.


Who comes to Stack Overflow with the idea that "I really need to know something, but I'm not sure what it is. I'll look at the top-voted questions and find out what question I need answered"?

No one.

You search to find questions you need. You tag topics you are involved with and watch for your tags on the front page.

When you've found the question you need, you read the answers, paying special attention, perhaps, to the accepted answer, to answers that have lots of upvotes, and to answers from people you recognize, or who have high reputations.

To me, it's silly to compare stats of the questions and answers, because they are apples and oranges.

  • 1
    The problem is... near-duplicates. Questions that look similar, but haven't been closed due to small difference or detail. You search for "[asp.net] disable back button" looking for what you think is a solution to an issue with WebForms, and get a couple pages of questions as a result. So, you can start reading them in order of what SO's search considers relevant, scan through for the ones with the most results... Or hit the "Votes" tab and find the most popular questions. Chances are, one of them contains the solution for you (even if it's not the solution you thought you wanted...)
    – Shog9
    Commented Jul 25, 2009 at 18:20

Perhaps by the time you've finished reading a really good question, the voting controls have been scrolled off the top of the page.

My rule of thumb is, if I found a question with an answer that is perfect for what I needed to know, they both get a vote up, unless the answer is already accepted (I know), AND if I am answering a question, I definitely vote the question up. It's worth something to have a clear, focused, and answerable question. Anything I can actually write an answer to falls into that description.


Upvoting questions should be reflecting that people who ask questions which lead to good answers are contributing to the knowledge base of the site. This currently is not working well.

This seems to be a problem with all such sites. I was just over on a site based on a model very much like SO. This site is still very new so it is not being flooded with questions. I asked two very basic questions (the type that should be in any wiki about the subject) neither had been asked on the website (and before someone comments they happened to be questions I didn't know the answer too). Both questions received answers and those answers received votes.

Someone wrote that often the question is not useful to them so they don't upvote it, but that the answer to that same question is useful, so they upvote the answer to that same quetion. Is that really the system working as intended? How wasn't the question helpful in that it was what led to the helpful answer?

Reasonable solutions I can think of:

Encourage those answering questions to upvote with a reminder if they have not already. Perhaps even a suggested list on how to evaluate questions (question is of wide interest, question adds to the technical knowledge base of SO, etc).

Alternatively, all answers should give some value (even if less than an actual upvote). Given that questions can be closed (which should remove points given for that question) and people can use comments (which probably should be used far more then downvoting).

Another approach would be when someone upvotes an answer to have the fly out ask about and allow voting on the question.

Yet another that answers who do not rate the question do not receive full points for their answers.


I try vote everyday on questions of the topics I find interesting (opencv tag) so people get encouraged to keep asking. Also I think it is good to vote (as the person who asks) up for those answers that try to help and are correct even if they are not really helpful or not the answer you would consider perfect.

I think that people in general is kind of greedy with voting and there are several good questions/ansawers with 0 votes that probably not many people will read.

  • 2
    I don't think it is good practice to upvote answers just because they were trying... especially if the answer is not helpful... I can try very hard to answer questions about C# but I probably wont help anyone... Vote on the content of posts, not on how hard the OP tried to answer...
    – Lix
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 13:22
  • 1
    I didn't mean that, I don't mean when the answer is wrong. I mean when the answer is correct, but it is not the super-answer that you would accept. Sometimes people just vote the accepted answer or even they accept they don't vote. Of course I don't don't vote wrong answers
    – Jav_Rock
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 13:24
  • 2
    If the answer is not really helpful then it doesn't really deserve an upvote. If you want to recognize the posters effort you could make a comment but voting for the sake of voting is a mistake.
    – Lix
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 13:49
  • -1: I concur with Lix. Your voting habits seem to be why so many weak questions, particularly by new posters, have 1 upvote. Trying to be helpful is not enough; you should only upvote if it is significantly good in some way. An answer that is correct but passable shouldn't be upvoted. Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 17:06
  • 2
    Yes, that point of view is also valid. But different people have different points of view. So a weak question for some can be a nice question for others. I found some posts with more than 100 votes weak, compared to others of less than 10.
    – Jav_Rock
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 17:47
  • Good answer. I vote up always if the question help if, never mind if its a bad question or not, i aprecciate when someone help me. Thanks a lot, Jav Rock, you are the light of my life.
    – vgonisanz
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 17:52

I know this might sounds a bit odd to some of you, but I didn't really see a place to vote.

Yeah, there are big honkin arrows, but they didn't jump out at me.

I kinda expected to vote on the question on the main browse page too, as done on other sites.

My suggestion, add + and - to the arrows. Yes, the Department of Redundancy Department.

  • also, you need 50 rep to vote... so there's another reason why it isn't letting you
    – Jiaaro
    Commented Sep 9, 2008 at 0:44
  • You can't vote on the main page because then you would likely get people voting on questions without actually reading the questions. Commented Sep 9, 2008 at 17:07

It might be because everyone's too busy using their votes on "threads" like this one. I think maybe we're trying to express two things with the question voting system, both that a question was a good one that everyone can learn from, and that a question needs attention from the community. Toss in the notion that lots of people are using votes to recognize the fun factor in a subjective question or to reinforce their opinion while "answering" such questions, and you can see why questions maybe aren't getting their due.

It is instructive to note that at the time this was written, the only two gold-badge level questions involve how to use this site (shouldn't that be in the faq?), and a "what do you think?" that's taken place on nearly every active board in the world. Two of the "Questions" filters are already drowning in noise.


I like the reputation restrictions. They keep me from making strange misinterpretations of concepts like 'down' and 'up' until I've had a chance to assimilate more of the culture here. Spending more time reading, rather than clicking, improves my feel for what each click would mean.

Rating based on 'useful' makes sense to me for answers, but not so much for questions. A thread might be useful, but the question itself? Well, the most I could say about one ordinarily is that it was interesting or thought-provoking.


Just posted a dupe question to this one (accidentally) so here is my question text as I am going to delete the duplicate:

I have noticed that when going into questions there can regularly be several answers to a legitimate question. The question is thoughtful, useful, well presented and yet has garnered no up-votes.

Surely if you are answering a question, then your first thought should be to upvoting it. I mean its in all our best interests surely, because the natural SO process will ensure that good questions feature prominently.

Nobody seems to think twice about upvoting 'Subjective' questions, which in my opinion (although I am guilty of some too) should not be applicable to upvoting, only to favourite<-ing> (Have I shot myself in the foot here with this highly subjective question?)

Its costs nothing to up-vote a legitimate, well-asked and useful question so why are people so reluctant?

I guess that this is the best place to put this...


Maybe instead of up/down voting, there could be a ranking for how general the question is? For example, the likelihood of others finding it useful.

I never vote on questions because it doesn't make sense to me. Which question is "better?"

  • How do I handle mouse clicks on a QTableView in Qt?
  • Why do I have to set my static variables outside of my class in C++?

I just see them as two different people having a frustrating time with whatever their current language is.

  • 1
    Trey, why should on a site for specialists should generalist questions be so much more valued? We know that people are going to ask the general questions anyways. Instead, wouldn't it be better to encourage people to add to the specialized knowledge we find difficult to find on other sites?
    – user136460
    Commented Oct 1, 2009 at 22:57

I will add in my own experience using Stack Exchange sites. Many sites (unpopular ones in particular, I primarily use the one related to natural sciences) have declined in both popularity and in terms of creating an encouraging environment because it has become too "strict" in terms of rules and regulations.

While some questions clearly deserve a downvote/closing (like homework questions). More often, a lot of curiosity-driven questions that are exploratory in nature get discouraged. Many users (including moderators) under the "influence of rules" do not seem to understand if a question addresses a "new" or "unusual" area, it is meant to be a bit broad and exploratory in nature. It also does not mean that it will be harder to answer, as being "open-ended" can attract very diverse and interesting answers. I saw a number of questions that would have the potential to receive tens of upvotes 5 years ago would now gone ignored/closed.

The end result is that it creates an environment where questions are strictly limited to a narrow focus and is well-researched already. Being specific means it is less likely for people outside the field of the narrow focus of the question to be hooked and therefore voted. Myself included, I have accustomed to such culture to the point that I simply "forget" to vote many times. Worse is that, it actually drives away users hence the lowering of popularity.

  • Yes, that is unfortunate. That is what comes from reputation points envy. Commented Jan 12, 2020 at 23:19

I upvote questions when I see that someone made his own thoughts about it, and he/she was searching before. I can see it if relevant information is present in the question. Whether or not the problem affects me doesn't make any difference to me.

And I take the chance to learn something that is new for me.

I sometimes have the feeling, if English is not your native language, and you cannot express yourself well, you are lost.


I hate to be Mr. Pessimist here, but I don't think voting will ever become a key component of Stack Overflow. The nature of the site is one in which voting is a filtering mechanism, and a way to help "face" content. However, I have no problem with that, and I actually prefer it. The goal of this site in my eyes, is instead to be a quick (but accurate) resource where programmers can ask questions, and get questions answered. It should also have a robust search feature, and be highly optimized for SEO so that programmers can use it as a long-standing and reliable resource. I really liked Yahoo! Answers for that reason. It was Q&A, plain and simple.

I really do hope that developers come here and have fun and participate because they enjoy the community, and enjoy helping others learn. If the elitism is absent, and a general notion of common sense and friendliness is apparent, this site will be a success.

  • 5
    You certainly were off on that prediction... Commented Sep 4, 2009 at 15:17

Maybe a question should not be voted per se, but have a kind of ranking based on how many and how high scorings answers it has.

  • I think I agree with you. To me, watching the scores of the questions is almost meaningless, especially if I'm not currently interested in one of the top tags (c#, .net, java, asp.net). I might be more interested in seeing an audio dsp question, and there are a lot fewer dsp wonks on SO than there are C# wonks.
    – Nosredna
    Commented Jul 25, 2009 at 17:57

The answer is easy for me - the site lets me vote on an answer in the same "place" that I read it, but I have to navigate to a new page to vote on a question. When I read down the long lists of questions, I see plenty that are obviously good questions, but since they aren't in my area of expertise, I don't bother opening the link, and I don't bother voting for the question. On the other hand, when I see a good answer, one click votes on it, and without taking me out of my "reading flow".

Add the "vote up/down" affordances to the question list pages, and I bet you'll see question voting take a substantial jump.

  • 4
    Doesn't make sense to me. You can't assess the quality of a question just by looking at its title. Commented Apr 8, 2014 at 15:53

As a possible solution, what about giving reputation for the number of views of a question to the question poster? Then again, bad questions could get a lot of views too. A multiplier on the current score, perhaps? But then this would make the system dynamic. Although you could just take into account the score at the current time when a view is made, and use fractional reputation scores which are rounded up / down. It's a tough problem.

Another solution might be upvotes / downvotes carrying more weight from users with more points.

  • Well. I see many users in my place, than always search exactly the text error than get in their machines, and not an idea about the problem or the APIs. The "useful post" button works fine to me. Commented Feb 21, 2012 at 21:58
  • Page views are a separate thing. They might be thousands of people who get confused by the question or which clicked for the title but found a mismatching content etc.
    – Nemo
    Commented Apr 30, 2015 at 12:15

I don't know why people don't vote, but one way to get people to vote more would be to provide a badge incentive that requires a lot of involvement. One suggested would be to extend Vox Populi - Used the maximum 40 votes in a day with

Max Vox Populi - Used the maximum 40 votes in a day 100 times.

or a somewhat better yet even worse suggestion:

Vote Distribution - Used the maximum 40 votes in a day 100 times on non-consecutive days.

  • 1
    We already have a badge for voting on questions.
    – Servy
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:46
  • @Servy, yeah I know, but this one requires 4000 votes, and each to be spent in a day.
    – JoshDM
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:47
  • Not on questions it doesn't.
    – Servy
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:48
  • Chances are, a lot of those will go to questions.
    – JoshDM
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:48
  • Not according to the premise of the question. If people are voting on answers but not on questions, telling them to vote more will just encourage them to vote on more answers, not on more questions.
    – Servy
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:49
  • 2
    This would also encourage people to vote on questions without really reading them or considering their content; it would encourage people to just blindly open posts and vote on them, which is harmful, not helpful.
    – Servy
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:50
  • 2
    They all do. Or something. I don't know, I didn't read your comment, I only upvoted it.
    – JoshDM
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 17:51

My idea is to remove the up/down arrows for questions completely, and completely replace the functionality provided by the 'upvote' arrow with the already-existing 'favourite' mechanism that allows you to keep track of posts, but would now give upvotes to the user (some kind of multiple perhaps), providing the question is not flagged and removed.

Unique SO user view count may also contribute to score. The flag mechanism would provide the 'downvoting' functionality, and removed questions would contribute negatively to score.

  • 8
    Disagree. Downvoting strongly encourages bad question askers to think twice before asking the next question. Otherwise they keep asking bad questions and bringing the overall quality of the site down.
    – user138231
    Commented Mar 1, 2013 at 15:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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