The Stack Exchange model is very different from that of discussion boards. We don't really do discussions here. Instead, the whole thing is focused on (hard) questions and direct answers to those questions.
If you want to discuss about role-playing games that's great, and we're collected a bunch of places where you can do that here, but this is not the ...
Be the small-games advocate on-stack you want to see on-stack
D&D is overwhelmingly represented on the site, but I don't believe it's a result of any artificial mechanism to monopolize the stack for D&D. It's more a combination of:
the actual larger audience for D&D - if you look at a general-audience convention like GenCon, D&D&...
No, you're fine! Someone else had their account removed, at their request. All the votes they ever made were removed from RPG.SE, which means that everyone lost any reputation earned from the removed votes. I got −8 myself.
Your −5 was probably because they upvoted one of your questions once; removing that vote removed the +5 reputation their ...
Reputation is the site's “fake Internet points” system. It is earned by contributing to the site in positive ways, which are primarily asking good questions and writing good answers about roleplaying games (as defined in our FAQ). Earning reputation unlocks site usage privileges when you have certain amounts.
The ability to write comments on other people's ...
So, the short answer is: because someone thought they were unclear, not researched, or not useful, and downvoted them.
The long answer is: You probably need to do some exploring of the help centre. In particular, our page on reputation explains all the details of how reputation works.
Stack Exchange is a community that works differently to regular forums, ...
Downvotes on questions don't take rep from the voter.
Deleted answers do restore rep lost from downvotes for both the poster and the voter, though it happens rather quietly. You should see a green +1 on your Achievements button but probably not any note about where it came from on the Achievements dropdown.
Your profile reputation tab will list the events ...
Downvoting is disincentivised (it's not just you), and that's deliberate. The help page on downvotes says this: “Voting down answers is not something we want you to take lightly, so it is not free.”
Stack Exchange's engineers want us to think carefully before we downvote something, want us to make sure it's worthwhile. A tiny -1 ping to our ...
This trend is baked into the system. High-profile tags like dnd-4e and pathfinder get the lion's share of our citizens' attention, for the very simple reason that it's what we're more likely to understand and maybe benefit from. This means threads with those tags get more action: more answers (good and bad) AND more votes (up and down, but we most often ...
Lets be clear here. Here is how the rep system works on non-community wiki posts:
From the FAQ
The rep system is in place to do the following things:
Encourage people to post good content
Encourage people to vote their feelings on content, particularly on questions
Discourage people from downvoting a lot on answers
Help the community grow by introducing a ...
I wonder - would it be effective to "shield" new members from reputation hits based on downvotes of their first question? Give them a little extra grace to work out what we're about here before sending them backwards? Or am I misunderstanding how this works so far?
You probably have misunderstood something. This thing you're describing here ...
"We" apparently can't, but individuals can.
On a given occasion, any individual who provides close votes, down votes, or comments on a new user's question can choose to engage in a warm and personable style. There is no policy requiring that yet, even though the churn currently going on at SE.META on "how to be more welcoming" and the draft "code of ...
A major problem for reviews is so-called "robo-reviewers", who click through queues for the review badges without actually reviewing - they just hit approve on everything, letting all the crap through that the review queues are supposed to keep out. The SE staff introduced review audits on certain large SE sites to try and stop people from doing this.
This won't be implemented for a few reasons:
We don't control the software. This would have to be altered at a very high level by Stack Exchange developer employees.
The purpose of the reputation system is to alter behaviour. This proposal suggests giving reputation for existing behaviour, but people are already motivated to help in comments, so there is no ...
Ask questions about non-D&D games you're interested in
Answer questions about non-D&D games you're interested in
Contribute answers without "D&D bias" to more general questions as well, noting that different games have different approaches (I do this)
There's no value, and SE central won't support I'm sure, 20-question fragment SEs for low ...
Basically, it's a throttle on your trust level.
Major moderation functions are tied directly to reputation (things like editing, voting to close and deleting). The reputation cap serves to prevent you from gaining privileges that are beneficial to the site, but can be used for nefarious purposes too quickly.
Even if you somehow managed to hit the rep-cap ...
That limit mainly exists for two reasons :
It stops the site from being gamed by automated bots since the reputation limit gives a lot more time to the moderators to find them before they attain trusted reputation levels.
It slows down reputation gain from very active or lucky users so they do not gain abilities before they have time to understand how the ...
They've been pretty firm about only providing reputation for core actions.
Those core actions are considered:
The only other thing you can get reputation for doing is getting confirmed suggested edits. That's it.
Reviewing stuff isn't a core action, it's a purely optional, privilege based activity.
In short, no.
The reputation system has evolved over at SO to the point that it should work everywhere, and mostly it does.
I had a question at -4 down votes and I argued my case in the comments and on the meta and had it opened, so I'm certain the system works. Now to address your points:
Firstly, and on the basest of levels, receiving a penalty stings....
Augh! You've discovered our secret!
The resemblance isn't a coincidence. Stack Exchange employs a thing called gamification - that's where the badges and reputation points come from. It's a nice reward, and helps motivate you to seek out stuff you can do to help.
You're not being mind-controlled though: various studies have found that gamification is only ...
Almost certainly nothing odd happening there. It got edited, which bumped it back to the front page. When this happens to a question, it generally gets some eyes on it which haven't seen it before, and this often leads to some more votes.
This problem has been reported on Meta.SE, and can be reproduced by generating a sufficiently large (~10) number of rep events over a time period of ~1 hour.
The bug has not been fixed as of July 2017.
The reputation on Meta is only updated once an hour.
See for example
My “Meta” rep on Photo.SE differs from my main rep on MSE. The highest answer links to "What is Meta?" in the Help Center, which states (emphasis mine):
Votes on meta do not affect your reputation; your meta reputation is the same as your reputation on Stack Overflow (synchronized ...
The Stack Exchange network has a reputation system, and you acquire privileges based on how much reputation you have. In particular, commenting on anyone's post requires having that privilege, which you get at the 50 reputation mark. Here're some links for information:
Commenting Privileges page
General Privileges track page
Reputation help page
A Handy ...
Lobby to restore game recommendation questions
Yes, that is something that you can do. No, it won't be easy. Change never is.
How to improve/maintain the quality-of-life of small fandoms in the
face of a dominant big fandom on an open Stack Exchange?
Game recommendation questions had a difficult time, and eventually died. One of the Great ...
I love stack exchange, but down-voting - as implemented here and just about everywhere else - is problematic in many ways. Here as it discourages new users. I know for a fact we've lost potentially good contributors because of it.
I happen to be an author on the topic, BTW:
Questions get upvoted & downvoted by readers, based on whether they think the question is a good one or not.
Hovering over the up/down buttons gives you a quick summary of the criteria:
This question shows research effort; it is useful and clear
For more information on how the site works, you can read the tour and help pages.
First, realize that this is fundamentally the wrong place for this discussion–this is a network-wide feature, and RPG will not be getting special behavior. In fact, RPG—along with nearly the entire network—will almost-certainly be stuck with whatever behavior works best for Stack Overflow, because that is, by a massive margin, the most popular, active, and ...