There's a small number of questions that are really well asked, a small number that are so bad I literally can't understand them, and a huge remainder that suck, but not so much that I can't piece together what they're looking for if I try hard enough. I generally only upvote questions if I think they'll help other people, or they're unusually well-written ...
At least for me the answer lies in the tooltip text for an upvote: this question shows research effort; it is useful and clear.
Most questions simply don't show any research effort at all. Many questions demonstrate that the author didn't even bother to do obvious things like using a search engine or to have a look at wikipedia. Not to mention the terrible ...
There is a difference between a poor question and a poorly asked question. A poor question would be one where there is insufficient detail to answer, it is an X-Y problem or is otherwise just a wreck.
A poorly asked question, which it seems the ones you linked to mostly represent (excluding the final one, naturally), have at their kernel a problem that can ...
I applaud your desire to upvote those that have helped you. Sadly SPAM and other nefarious activities are a sad fact of the modern internet. So these limits are in place. But it turns out your idea has been implemented. It is just that the thresholds are a bit higher than your proposal.
As soon as you have 200 points on any SE site, then you will be ...
Upvote button hover text:
This question shows research effort; it is helpful and clear
The fact that someone answers a question does not, de facto, make it a good question. Questions may have answers and show zero research effort, or be borderline incomprehensible and people will still answer them.
Upvotes are the only signifier of quality.
For myself. I answer questions I know the answer to (that are not homework). But I upvote questions that I want to know the answer to (because it got me thinking, or because I have that issue as well). Rarely do I upvote and answer. Only if the question is one that I think supports many people, is really well written, and I also know the answer to.
Now as ...
I'm just speculating, since of course an actual answer could only come from... a committee of downvoters. And I may be thinking about the wrong examples, since you didn't provide any in your question.
In my experience, the kind of questions you are referring to receives at most one or two downvotes. As you note, even if they appear to show some pattern, a ...
I would answer your question with your own words:
We downvote because we don't see any value in someone's contribution. That is obvious. It's there for all to see.
In general, votes are for rating. Rating allow us to separate the signal from the noise.
I think Caleb's answer is on the right track, but it has a fatal flaw: I want an easy way to know how many votes I have left before voting, not after.
It does give me an idea: include the current vote count in the tooltip. For example, instead of ”This answer is useful“, show “This answer is useful (39 votes left)”.
it would be nice to be informed of edits to a post which one has downvoted
I had a similar thought, and chased it down through various Metas, eventually landing at Stack Apps: Get a list of posts you've voted on that have been edited where there's a browser-based userscript that adds a sub-tab to your profile's Votes tab.
I use it occasionally by going to ...
One of the things that takes a little getting used to is the whole voting on the SE sites. Everyone in the SE universe that has 15 rep or higher is allowed to vote up, and 125 rep for down.
In the beginning, when I first frequented the sites, I too would see what appear to be perfectly valid questions with -1 or -2 or even 0. Then I posted my first ...
In my opinion, I think there's a semi-active user that is exercising their right to vote and is doing so on some criteria that obviously doesn't align with 16+ other voters. It's the disparity of that -1 (or more) followed by the +15 that sticks out, but it's likely that other posts are also being voted on but don't make it to +15.
I'm actually not sure ...
No, you would have to cast the vote again after you reach 15 rep, since your vote wasn't actually a full/normal vote. See Once I reach 15 reputation, will my old votes be taken into account? for more.
My suggestion at this point would be to "favorite" (star) the corresponding question(s) to make it easier to rediscover them when you can vote.
This isn't a bug, this is by design:
Welcome back! If you found this question useful, don't forget to vote both the question and the answers up.
only appears if
you haven't been seen on the target site for 48 hours
you hold a valid user cookie on the target site
your account has more than 15 rep on the target site
That's a privilege that you receive when you get to the 1000 point level. But you can install this browser plugin to unlock it on all SE sites.
“View Vote totals” without 1000 rep
Why can't I click on the up/down vote counter to see how the breakdown looks?
If anything, downvotes on answers are more important than upvotes. Downvotes are the only way we have of indicating that an answer is bad. "Bad" could mean anything from inelegant, through not actually working and all the way to actively dangerous. Without downvotes, we would have no way of pushing such bad answers down, without downvotes, upvotes would be ...
There are two distinct issues at play here:
Is it a good question?
Yes? Then upvote it.
Is it something I would like to answer?
Yes? Then write an answer?
Those issues are not equivalent nor exactly related.
On the good side, a question could be well written and about a good subject. Related to the site goals and writing an answer to it will improve the ...
There are no stupid questions, but quite a few inquisitive idiots.
And I once was young and very green too. That which is trivial for me now, was not always
I answer more questions than I ask and rarely upvote on questions.
Some of the ones I answer fall in the category, where the asker simply does not know the correct jargon and I feel a ...
A point, that @terdon (+1) alludes to, but that doesn't across clear enough: Down-votes are essential to make some answers disappear, (imho)
Especially among the older questions there are some really terrible answers, with consequences ranging from wasted time (already bad) to actual data loss (very bad). Granted, the really super-destructive answers get ...
You didn't cite any examples, but I suppose many of those are basic questions that receive a few "you idiot, why don't you know this?" downvotes in the beginning, and then hit the Hot Network Questions list where most viewers can only upvote, so they do.
I believe that basic questions should be closed as duplicates rather than silently downvoted, but ...
I sometimes do not upvote if I feel there is a missing detail which should be added to the question. In particular, I sometimes comment that the question should specify the exact distribution and version it was observed on. Even though I may have a plausible answer to write as well.
I think it's a good point to think about. So if I don't feel very ...
It's one downvote. Shrug it off.
A downvote doesn't indicate that a question is off-topic, too broad, primarily opinion-based or unclear. That's what close votes are for. (Unclear is also part of the guidelines for downvoting.)
People can vote for whatever reason they like. There is official advice, but the only actual rule is to vote for the post and not ...
I second this request. Months and months later I still miss it and inability to ration votes well is a poor way to contribute to high signal to noise ratios on the sites I frequent.
I propose adding the information back in the form of a popup when voting, beginning with the first vote of the day.
You have 39 votes left.
Currently this warning does not ...