This question already has an answer here:
Diminishing returns / non-linear reputation from âgreatâ answers
Life isn’t fair [duplicate]
A while back I saw a question (Q1) about why the unix command
cat was called that and what was the use when you could simply use
Question was well received and upvoted, but the actual reaction should have been, Asking “What research did you do ?”, which is a general site-requirement.
I also saw a question (Q2) about
tee which (the OP claimed) did nothing and why it was so named.
Again, Question was well received and upvoted, but the actual reaction should have been, Asking “What research did you do ?”
Now I see a question (Q3) in CSE titled “Control Flow Statements Explained” but the title is not accurate; It is about running an infinite loop with a finite number of transistors.
Instead of upvoting or answering, the question should have been edited for clarity, which is a general site-requirement.
Again, in Puzzling SE, I sometimes see questions (Q4) which have so many “correct” answers that OP keeps saying “Oh, that is right but that is not what I was thinking” and finally accepts the nearest to what he was thinking.
Here a site-requirement is that Puzzle questions should have only one correct answer. Hence question should be Put on hold (or even Closed or Deleted) until it is edited such that only one answer is possible.
I have seen many more such cases of low quality Posts getting upvoted and getting into HNQ.
All these questions are well received and upvoted, but the actual reaction should have been something else.
Meanwhile, I have see questions which follow the site-requirements, are clear and are well-researched, but get downvoted and deleted, or edited beyond recognition.
Why such arbitrary behaviour by community ?
Some thoughts on why this happens:
(R1) a new question gets a view from a random newbie who may want rep Points, so he is ready to answer silly questions which can be answered elsewhere, and his initial upvote draws in more upvotes which may lead to HNQ selection.
(R2) a new question gets a view from somebody who downvotes questions he does not like [I have seen such comments like “I downvoted because I feel others may not be interested in this”] and this downvote leads to more downvotes.
(R3) Some readers think that answering is easier than editing questions ( Newbies may not even be aware of editing ) ; Now the answers bring in more viewership and more answers.
(R4) Some times, I see the formation of cliques, who upvote answers by each others.
I may be partially right or even entirely wrong. Hence I am asking here.
I also suggest the following:
(S1) Maybe remove downvoting. Upvote good questions. Flagging of Bad questions is enough. Ignore questions you are not interested in.
(S2) Do not show downvotes or upvotes for X hours.
(S3) Let the site community select questions for HQN.
(S4) When a low quality Post is Deleted, inform (and may be Penalise) those who upvoted.
None of these suggestions will work, but maybe this Post will encourage thinking on this Issue (Provided, it does not get downvoted itself!)