5 replaced http://stackapps.com/ with https://stackapps.com/
source | link

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumventedbut this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

4 replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 repis only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not aloneand I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

3 replaced http://meta.wordpress.stackexchange.com/ with https://wordpress.meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.comcapitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQtwo answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

I think using up- or downvotes on meta is an easy way to see whether we agree with an idea or not. For me, this has nothing to do with how the idea was presented: if I agree, I upvote, if I don't, I downvote.

Take, for example, one of my proposals for the domain name: capitalpdangit.com. It has some upvotes, but once was at -1 or -2, so it must have some downvotes too (unless the voters undid their votes). This given an indication that people are more divided on this idea than on others, which is good to know. If we only had upvotes, we only had half the information. I think this information is also used in moderator elections (some sites had more controversial nominees).

I think I used downvotes twice on the meta site, on two answers about the contents of the FAQ. I disagreed with them, gave a comment explaining why, and gave an alternative answer. We can't force people to give comments when they downvote, but I try to do it.

For performance reasons, the detail of up- and downvotes is only accessible if you have +1000 rep (but this can be circumvented). I think (and I am not alone) that this should change on meta sites, since downvotes could be used in a different way here.

2 Migration of MSO links to MSE links
source | link
1 Post Made Community Wiki
source | link