-4

alright, heres one thing which really bothers me so much, i'd like to throw with thing:

Downvotes, without visible reason.

i mean, everyone downvotes a bad awnser or question, sure.

isnt it a mighty fine idea to make comments REQUIERED for downvoting? as in, if my question or awnser gets dwnvoted, i actually know WHY? so i can IMPROVE it, or in the future?

or is meta not the place to ask/suggest about implenting that feature? because it really bothers me i dont know why someone downvted questions... all i can think of is a possible typo? is that a valid reason to downvote, still, someone should think of that...

Edit for clarification:

What im requesting, is the feature, that you can only downvote, if you comment on the downvoted question/awnser, to let the person know why

1
  • 4
    Downvote because ① I think it's a really bad idea that would greatly reduce the signal to noise ratio of the SE nework, ② you don't appear to have done any research into this issue to figure out why this functions the way it does, and ③ you haven't taken even simple pains like following basic English punctuation and capitalization rules that make things easier on everybody. – Caleb Jun 3 '14 at 7:16
9

This is absolutely not going to happen. It has been discussed many times on meta.se and the cons far outweigh the pros. These include revenge voting, leveraging pressure, general nastiness etc.

We can encourage people to comment, but can't force them to. It costs rep to down vote so they are doing so for a reason. It can be harder identifying that reason if they don't comment, but that is just part of what we work with.

Example questions:

1
  • 3
    "We can encourage people to comment, but can't force them to." Well, we can force them to comment, but we can't force that comment to be more informative than "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa". – doppelgreener May 30 '14 at 0:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .