Timeline for Is "reciprocal voting" permitted?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 30, 2013 at 3:49 | comment | added | Kim Morrison Mod | @MichaelHardy, as we've mentioned a number of times, e.g. meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/833/… anyone can reach the moderators via [email protected]. | |
| Sep 28, 2013 at 6:23 | comment | added | Anton Geraschenko Mod | @MichaelHardy: tea.mathoverflow.net/search | |
| Sep 27, 2013 at 22:20 | comment | added | Michael Hardy | @Did : I would like to adduce data. This present version of "meta" has existed only since the recent conversion to stackexchange. If I had access to a searchable form of the old "meta", than I would gather up the data and present it either here or to the moderators. (BTW, contact information for one of the six moderators is nowhere to be found, and for four of the others, it is not on stackexchange; one must search the web.) | |
| Sep 27, 2013 at 12:47 | comment | added | Did | @MichaelHardy Data? | |
| Sep 26, 2013 at 4:46 | comment | added | Michael Hardy | .....but perhaps I should add that organized bullying does exist on stackexchange and mathoverflow. | |
| Sep 26, 2013 at 4:35 | comment | added | Michael Hardy | I have a reputation of slightly under 60,000 on math.stackexchange.com and I am not able to see how anyone votes, other than myself. | |
| Sep 25, 2013 at 13:45 | answer | added | David E Speyer | timeline score: 18 | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 23:37 | comment | added | François G. Dorais Mod | If you suspect fraudulent or malicious voting, contact the moderators and they will conduct an investigation. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 13:05 | comment | added | Gerald Edgar | So ... the question about why votes are anonymous may be relevant here ... meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/828/… | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 8:58 | answer | added | user35354 | timeline score: 10 | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 3:12 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | I've nothing more to add, and don't know what to say. I've reported what facts I know. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 2:54 | comment | added | user40280 | @ToddTrimble No, this is about question threads that don't get bumped up at all. I just upvote or downvote an answer, and then a little later I get the corresponding vote on my question. And when this phenomenon occurs (assuming it's not in my head), it doesn't happen in the opposite direction, where I get a downvote after giving an upvote, or vice versa. But as I said, I may be wrong about the high-reputation users thing. It may just be that they comprise a lion's share of the answers, so I'm getting a misleading impression of them. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:55 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | I reeeeaaaalllllyyyy doubt it's some sort of subconscious reaction on the part of high-rep users. If there's something that's bumping the question to the front page, then people who hadn't seen the question before might be voting, pro or con. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:45 | comment | added | user40280 | @ToddTrimble Well, it might be a subconscious thing. And the high-reputation users part may just be a coincidence; they're the ones who frequently answer questions, so it may just seem like it happens more often with them. Or this could all be in my head, which is likely if no one else reports this phenomenon. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:43 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | If you want to know my opinion, though, I think your proposed explanation (the "psychological thing") is extremely unlikely for high rep users. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:40 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | I am only reporting what I know, speaking as a user with 24.1k rep. I think moderators have tools I don't have access to which might enable them to track voting patterns. I'm not sure what you are seeing or what you think you are seeing. I see now that Scott Carnahan has also answered, in a manner consistent with what I know. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:37 | comment | added | user40280 | @ToddTrimble Could it be some psychological thing, like when a user is upvoted, they think to themselves "Wow, it looks like people really liked my answer. That's great! It was an excellent question after all, so I'm glad I answered it", and if they're downvoted they think to themselves "My answer didn't do very well. But what could I have done? The question didn't really make much sense in the first place."? | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:37 | answer | added | S. CarnahanMod | timeline score: 8 | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:31 | comment | added | user40280 | @ToddTrimble Can absolutely no one see this information? Can moderators not see it either? What else can explain how old questions get upvoted the day after an answer has been upvoted, and correspondingly with downvoting? Is it that the user sees that their answer has been upvoted or downvotes, not knowing by who, but then because of that they decide to look at the question again and vote on it? | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:27 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | No, they cannot see anything of the sort. | |
| Sep 21, 2013 at 1:25 | history | asked | user40280 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |