Yeah, we do care about our posts. We do not take it lightly when we receive a downvote. We try to make the post better.
In the best case we have an explanation in a comment to help us what could be done. In the second best case we see for ourselves what we did wrong. In both cases we will not hesitate to improve our post with an edit, well knowing that ever ...
Votes on meta are a completely different thing than votes on main. Since they carry no penalty (for either caster or receiver) they are often given more freely. Most importantly, voting on Meta is very often just a way to express agreement or disagreement.
So, if you make a proposal I dislike, I will downvote it to demonstrate that I don't agree and wouldn'...
Yeah some things look right (so attract votes for effort) but are technically incorrect. It happens to anybody who answers enough on the site.
There are things you can do that are genuinely useful:
Leave a comment. Explain what is wrong and why. Be technical. This lets the poster and other potential voters know. They can fix it, or even explain why they ...
This is one of the things I hate most on SE, people who think downvoting is mean and we should not do it voting to cancel out downvotes, it wastes my vote, your vote, gives to OP rep for a bad post.
Just like silly downvotes exist, silly upvotes exist. The first one probably more often than the latter. I never ever heard of someone, voting to eliminate a ...
No, there is no time limit on voting. As long as a post continues to exist, it's useful for its score to be displayed to show people what other members of the community thought of it. It remains useful to be able to vote up or down on the post, just as it remains useful to be able to edit or comment on the post. The system allows votes to be cast on old ...
I agree with this post. Though from my inspection, number of bad questions has increased on the site as number of daily visits has. But It's also true that many good questions as well as answers are left un-upvoted.
Voting is at the heart of a successful SE site. I think it's a warning sign if that decreases.
We should try to vote whenever it is possible. ...
Meta isn't rep gaining. Never has been never should be.
The point of voting tends to be to show agreement or disagreement with a given thread or answer. There are many "make a collective decision" threads which exist and then general agreement or disagreement can be met through voting or such. That's the purpose really for votes on meta.
For feature ...
My two cents;
Don't browse users, browse questions.
If you're genuinely enthusiast about a user's post, upvote it. Comments shouldn't be used for that, but if from time you time you like a post so much that you feel like letting the user know that you liked it, you won't be pilloried for that.
You shouldn't be serial upvoting a user. Really, don't serial ...
I think it's good that the system does this, and I don't think it should be more difficult for questions to be deleted automatically.
I think that what happened in Franck Dernoncourt's case is terrible and I really hope that it gets sorted out quickly. But I think that case is exceptional, and should not be considered a flaw in the system, but rather a case ...
I usually vote up a question if it meets any of these conditions:
I can answer it with the information given and I don't see any reason why it should be closed
Someone else has answered it well or I know someone else will be able to answer it and I don't see any reason why it should be closed
It seems to be a useful/interesting question and includes enough ...
I do object however strongly to a structural exchange of favours. Probably just inside the limits of what the system allows and detects.
A big issue here is that the system for detecting this has a couple of really basic flaws, which cause it to miss votes on a regular basis and which make it a bit too obvious what those limits are.
I've written a query ...
Reasons a post could be downvoted include, but are not limited to:
Somebody hates you.
The user who downvoted always downvotes on the first Thursday of every month.
Someone misunderstood your answer.
Someone dislikes your avatar.
Someone hates bash, why are you using bash?
Someone is having a bad day
Your answer has errors.
You left a comment ...
In your profile page, you can find a summary of your votes at the bottom.
But to see the detailed history of your votes, click on the votes tab in the your profile.
In your case, the page for your profile is at http://meta.askubuntu.com/users/263205/a-j?tab=votes. (Votes are private, so this page is private for your eyes only. Not even mods can see it.)
Voting, both up and down, is a completely "anonymous" function of the site. In that you can do it either way to your hearts content and vote whichever way you chose. It's your votes.
We are not here to make everyone conform, if someone wants to upvote what appears to be spam then fine. If someone wants to downvote what appears to be an excellent question ...
To answer both questions with one blithe statement: I don't think we do.
Now, that might not be the most useful answer to your question, but I'm speaking as one of the people tasked with attempting to apply this stuff, and largely speaking, keeping the wheels turning. Trying to define solid rules on quorum and then how opinion-de-jour gets applied to the ...
Although I think terdon's answer is the main reason for the number of upvotes, I'd like to add a couple more reasons that help as well. And since you specifically mentioned the homepage in your question.
Questions on Meta aren't near as frequent as on the main site. So the questions tend to last longer on the homepage, which allows them to accumulate more ...
I have to agree with your assessment of the recent question quality. This may be just due to an influx of new users who think any question they can't answer must be a good one. To be fair, I have no doubt that I made similar mistakes in my early days here. I try to make it a practice to only up-vote questions that clearly comply with the guidelines.
In my ...
After carefully reviewing the question at hand, I have come to the following conclusions:
The question is wholly useless.
It's not going to help anyone by any sense of the word. It's a humorous question at best, and offers nothing of note to the site.
It shows absolutely zero research effort.
Even the most precursory research on Google would answer this ...
A few thoughts & observations I made over the years:
Voting on Meta questions and answers is often not done on strictly rational grounds. Two posts, in fact saying the same, can have opposite voting. Even in a time span of a few days.
Although we try to make things generic, questions and answers on meta are often strongly related to, and ...
See extensive discussion on Meta SE. Quoting the Jon Skeet:
If a comment is wrong, respond to it with another comment. That provides a lot more information than a downvote which could mean anything.
If you want to debate this, take it to Meta SE.
Upvotes should be only for questions which have details of what exactly is the problem and what they have done till now to solve it.
Meanwhile, new users can sometimes ask questions which look silly for programmers who are using ubuntu for a long time now.Also they can just find it's solution by searching Google but they won't.The reason is they think ...
Does any answer to a question that fully answers the question deserve an upvote even if it is an unexperienced users answer being viewed by an experienced user?
It doesn't matter how experienced or inexperienced a user is when they answer a question. A proper answer will have references and crosslinks to documentation. Vote on the content of the post, not ...
By offering a bounty, you're giving something up in exchange for... well, advertising.
What exactly you give up depends on what you have, but at very least you're giving up some amount of status and potentially privileges on the site as well.
Why should someone who has earned reputation elsewhere be immune to this when someone else who has worked hard to ...
I love the list of "Unexplained downvote reasons" and agree that downvoting without constructive criticism isn't an effective method of training. Further downvoting just because you don't agree with the approach is rather childish. Testing solutions and upvoting those that work for you makes more sense to me.
I might downvote an answer if it ...
I for one take voting very seriously.
I upvote questions that I answer as clearly I found them interesting enough to answer them. Ideally they should meet the minimum guidelines. This might be after editing/obtaining the bare minimum information required to understand/answer the question.
Answers I typically test for functionality prior to voting unless I ...
I agree with you that the number of incorrect* off-topic - not about Ubuntu close votes has seemed particularly high of late. In addition to the two you mentioned, I've noticed that questions about Firefox and LibreOffice, questions asking for software recommendations, questions about text-processing, questions about dual-boot systems, questions about WSL, ...
A great proposal. I think when down-voting anyone you should give a comment. Indeed I think the software suggests you do so.
We all started with rep zero. We are all human beings with feelings and especially on this platform we should be professional with manners, decorum, proper etiquette and appropriate empathy to others.
I've noticed a occasional ...
My biggest criteria for downvoting are as follows:
Inaccuracy. On a question / answer based support website, providing accurate, applicable, reliable answers to questions is the number one priority.
Complete Unintelligibility. This site is somewhat special, because we can edit others' posts. If it is unsalvageably unreadable, however, it doesn't belong ...
Removed the function because you thought it unnecessary.
Removed some unnecessary elifs
Changed the order of the conditionals
Those are the 3 downvotes, right there because:
The OP very probably used a function because he/she/it had his/her/its reasons
The code very probably has a bunch of stuff taken out to simplify the question
The code very ...