Reduce or don't award reputation for Docs upvotes [closed]

Question

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.

---

The problem described here can no longer be reproduced. Changes to the system or to the circumstances affecting the asker have rendered it obsolete. If you encounter a similar problem, please post a new question.

Closed 7 years ago.

Improve this question

It seems like Documentation is more of a Rep Gold Mine rather than a useful source for referencing since only a few examples are good and useful, while the rest are just low-quality which are unclear or not useful at all.

Ability to get so much reputation from Docs would make reputation worthless, since it's so easy to get.

On a sidenote, I think that Documentation's quite useful, and would really help users who want to learn a new language.

---

Proposed Solution 1:

Therefore, would it be possible not to award reputation for Docs upvotes, and only award reputation for Upvotes on answers that cite Documentation, Requested topic created and Proposed change approved.

In my opinion, there's no point in awarding reputation for upvotes in Docs. However, Approved Proposed Change will be awarded +10 instead of the current +2.

My rationale is that it would encourage users to contribute high-quality examples to Documentation since it's the main purpose of having reputation.

Reputation will still be awarded when a question that cites the example gets upvoted.

So, reputation gains from Docs will include:

(削除) +0 Example upvoted (削除ここまで)

+5 Upvotes on answers that cite Documentation

+2 Requested topic created

+10 Approved Proposed Change

---

Proposed Solution 2:

Award +2 for all upvotes instead of +5. This would reduce the amount of reputation gained from Docs.

So, reputation gains from Docs will include:

+2 Example upvoted

+5 Upvotes on answers that cite Documentation

+2 Requested topic created

+2 Approved Proposed Change

---

Some related posts: (Credits to @TerraPass for pointing out :)

• Documentation shares the work: make the rewards shared, not multiplicative
• Can we please introduce more reputation limits for examples on Documentation?
• https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/329736/1051764
• Documentation shares the work: make the rewards shared, not multiplicative (I also agree with this answer)

Clarification:

This is not really a duplicate of other related questions as I have elaborated more on the solutions that I believe would solve this.

Any comments on this?

• TerraPass: Why not make this into a feature-request? Funnily enough, I was in the process of writing a feature request to remove reputation from upvotes myself, when I saw your post.
• Panda: @TerraPass Yup, forgot about the tag. Coincidence ;-)
• ryanyuyu: Very related: Don't give me reputation points for making an edit to a Documentation topic (your question has more detail implementation as a feature request)
• TerraPass: I think that it would be enough to simply award no reputation for upvotes, without increasing rep for approved changes: it would be best to avoid any additional incentive to make edits for the sake of edits in the Docs.
• Panda: @ryanyuyu Yup, I came across that question too, but that doesn't really go into detail what to implement
• TerraPass: Other related posts (not duplicates): meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/329506/… meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/329940/… And also this answer, which, in my opinion, gets to the nub of the matter: meta.stackoverflow.com/a/329736/1051764 Might want to add links to them.
• Jon Ericson: See also: my answer (with data) to Documentation shares the work: make the rewards shared, not multiplicative.
• Heretic Monkey: @TylerH ... which ends with: "Are these new values set in stone now? Hell naw. This is a beta..." So, proposing changes is not a duplicate (IMO).
• TerraPass: @TylerH I don't see how this concrete feature-request can be a duplicate of what is essentially a status report by a SO developer (a status report, explicitly inviting feedback, no less).
• TerraPass: I might really be missing something, but how is this a duplicate? Can some of the duplicate-voters please clarify?
• TylerH: @TerraPass This is requesting that reputation for docs be changed. That post mentions a few times that reputation for docs will be changed. This question is therefore asking for something that has already been announced as going to happen; it's superfluous.
• TerraPass: @TylerH I beg to differ. That post doesn't specifically allow for the possibility that reputation gain from example upvotes might be entirely removed and, in the case of reduction, it doesn't discuss exact numbers. Moreover, it explicitly asks for user feedback. Isn't the present feature-request an example of such feedback?
• Panda: @TerraPass Thanks for your input! Let's watch and see what gets implemented in the end ;-)
• Inzimam Tariq IT: 10+ Approved Proposed Change does not seems meaningful But reduction on upvoted example is good.
• Nicol Bolas: @Fire-Dragon-DoL: "Isn't the entire purpose of the reputation to push for edit/updates/improvements?" No. The way reputation ought to work is this: sharing your information is the goal; reputation is gratitude for having done so. If getting rep is ever your goal, then you're doing it wrong.