Upvote this answer if you think we should ask StackExchange to allow us to opt out of the "hot list". (I'm adding this answer because it was not clear what an upvote to the main question would mean.)


I'm a 101-rep user on MO. I created an account because it's very easy to do so when you go to MO. I've never voted and never will, as there's no way I could understand enough to do so intelligently. I suspect that it would be a lot easier to change the privilege levels (which, in fact, already vary from site to site) so that "vote up" is 125 on MO, the ...


Upvote this answer if you think we should ask StackExchange to allow us to opt out of the "association bonus".


What do you think about the idea of further restrictions to voting? We could require 50 reputation and at least one question or answer with positive votes. This would nullify the effects of "association bonus" on voting but it would keep its other benefits.


1.1% of upvotes on MO are from users who have never posted. Hardly seems worth getting worked up over, but I'm not a mathematician. Forking an SQL query mentioned by ScottMorrison, I found: 1,333 MO users with no posts have given 9,159 upvotes and 2 downvotes. (query) There are a total of 35,678 MO users, 854,611 upvotes and 53,939 downvotes. (query) ...


I messed around a little with the spreadsheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkdAf5FqZ2CBdDJfdDFvVXFuSkxYQU1YeFpJaVM0MlE&usp=sharing My new columns are: ratio of votes/external votes. (Note that i used the quotient function which rounds the quotient to the nearest integer) comments. In the comments i was concerned about questions with ...


Here is a spreadsheet with more extensive data on the 385 posts with at least two "external" votes. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Avlld30uD7CodHdLVmJUUV90RHlSSkVTVVVydmtOc1E&usp=sharing The columns are: Post ID. Total post upvotes minus downvotes (regardless of origin). Total post upvotes from users whose only points are from the ...


It seems that the bounty you offered adds $-100$ to what counts as "reputation earned on this site" for the purpose of answering protected questions. At least, that is my understanding based on the explanation given here: Stack Exchange doesn't allow me to answer protected questions because I gave away earned rep in bounties (Meta Stack Exchange; ...


The minimum reputation for setting bounties is 75, which is less than the association bonus of 100. So any person with an association can immediately post a bounty. I suggest that the association bonus should be smaller than the reputation needed to set bounties.


I am more familiar with MSE and I do not know what exactly were the moderators messages about. But if they were about some comments, that users were only able to post due to rep from association bonus, isn't there a danger that removing the bonus would make situation worse for mods? (As far as the comments are concerned.) I would imagine that many newbie ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible