I have a moral problem with the votes and bounty reward on the following question: One single cron job not running in which user Елин Й.has posted an answer that in my believe is:

  • unhelpful (because the asker stated in a comment that (s)he has added sudo to see if it did make any difference)
  • a low quality answer (because it does not make any effort to solve the original question)
  • not even an decent answer because it is not much more than an oneliner.

The asker hasn't accepted any answer yet so I believe the reward of half of the bounty is wrong here and I don't understand why a low quality answer gets upvotes at all.

(And Yes: I do understand how the bounty gets rewarded, and No: I don't think my own answer is better).

I feel something has to be done against users that are apparently only after getting reputation points instead of helping others out and this one is not the only example. I can find several others.

  • 3
    Bounties are offered by individual users. It's their right and their decisions what to do with that reputation. The bounty-awarded answer and accepted answers very often are different, because while question asker might find one answer working for him/her, proper canonical answer might be something else . Also, one-liner answers are not necessarily bad - many issues are solvable with oneliners. – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy Dec 28 '15 at 2:11

I have a moral problem with the votes and bounty reward on the following question

Speaking of the votes: those are fair.


Because important details should be edited into the question and not added as a comment.

Answerers and voters shouldn't really have to look into the comments section before voting, and the question as it stood highly suggested sudo being the problem (I falled for that myself: see my comments under the question).

So technically that would be OP's fault, but you can't really blame it on them too much IMO since they're a user only since 14 days.

Speaking of the bounty; this:

Bounty Started worth 50 reputation by GreenGodot

And this:

Bounty Ended with Елин Й.'s answer chosen by Community♦

Mean that OP started a bounty to draw attention to their question and that this happened:

If you do not award the bounty within 24 hours of the bounty period ending, half the bounty value will be automatically awarded to the top voted answer posted after the bounty start, provided it has a score of at least 2.

Fair? Obviously not always, but the problem is that likewise obviously a bot can't deem answers valid itself. Deeming answers valid is up to the voters, and the bot acts in behalf of them.

So, summing up, you can't really blame it on anyone.

OP can't be blamed too much, the answerer can't be blamed, the voters can't be blamed and the Community♦ user can't be blamed.

You must log in to answer this question.

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