Is this a good justification for frequent downvoting and closing?

Question

There is a lot of downvoting on this site without any constructive feedback. Closings are also frequent. You can see this by just looking around. As I write this question, the three newest questions in meta are addressing (in a different way) all of the downvoting.

A popular justification for the large number of downvotes is that this site is meant for serious questions about English that are of interest to linguists and language experts, but the site receives a ton of basic questions, and it's these questions that are being correctly downvoted. I see several problems with this explanation.

1. Downvoting without offering feedback is not a nice or effective solution to the stated problem.
2. There are plenty of nonbasic questions that follow all of the guidelines and still receive downvotes, and there is also much downvoting of answers, so this doesn't account for all of the negative behavior.
3. When someone does ask a question specifically about the English language and of interest to linguists or language experts, the question gets single-sentence answers from high-rep (5-50k) users, suggested as more appropriate for LinguisticsSE (and now apparently migrated there), or closed as off-topic (and now apparently migrated to LinguisticsSE) -- oh, and of course, it gets plenty of downvotes.
4. There are tons and tons of open, answered questions on this site that are very basic, have the same exact general answer, and are currently being answered, e.g., "What's the difference between [foo] and [foo with a productive derivational suffix affixed]?", so the downvoting and closing seems arbitrary or worse.

Am I alone in finding this behavior and proposed justification to be inconsistent, not supported by the evidence, and a huge problem for the site? This behavior has at least made me--after only a few days of it--not want to stick around here, despite my love of English, language, linguistics, and sharing knowledge. This site should be perfect for me, but the rampant and inconsistent downvotings and closings are repulsive.

Edit to address some of the answers: I'll give my thoughts on this to see where our disagreement might be. If someone's reason for downvoting is:

1. It's not clear what this question is asking due to insufficient explanation. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, post this comment: "It's not clear what you're asking. Please give more details." That takes less than 10 seconds and encourages improvement of the site's content.
2. This question is poorly phrased/has lots of mistakes. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, edit the question and fix the mistakes. This could be quick if the mistakes are minor. If it's just a huge mess, I don't know what would be best. I think it would be nice to be able to flag such a question for other users to edit. In extreme cases, maybe closure or deletion is best.
3. This question is asking about something that we don't handle here. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, migrate or close. And especially, stop people from answering it (!!), as this only encourages more of the same questions in the future, from this user or others who see it being answered.
4. This question is asking something that I find stupid or think we shouldn't handle here. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, discuss changing the scope of the site in meta.
5. This question has been asked and answered here already. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, (vote to) close as duplicate and leave this comment: "I think this question has already been answered [here]."
6. This question is too basic. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, (vote to) close as general reference and possibly leave this comment: "We don't handle questions that can be answered by looking in [wherever they can find the answer]. If you don't understand the answers in [wherever], please explain your confusion." Especially, stop people from answering it (!!). I also think that the explanation given on the general reference closure notice should be expanded (with a sentence or few words) to be more informative and include a link to a few general references where the question can likely be answered.
7. This question falls under one of the other reasons that we already have for closing questions. Not a reason to downvote. Instead, (vote to) close for that reason and possibly leave a comment sharing your objection in case it doesn't get closed or for the benefit of others before it gets closed.
8. This answer is very inaccurate and misleading. Maybe a reason to downvote. I think it's best to voice your objection in a comment for the benefit of other readers. E.g., "That isn't true. A look in a dictionary or a google search will prove this," or "That isn't true. There is much debate about this topic. Google 'chomsky jackendoff'." Usually, I think you should give the poster a chance to fix their answer. In extreme cases or after no improvement has been made, then I think a downvote is a very good way to improve the site.
9. This post already has comments asking for improvements that only the poster can make, and the poster has had time to make improvements but has not. A good reason to downvote or perhaps delete (I don't know much about how deletions work).
10. I don't like the person who posted this. Not a good reason to downvote. Instead, discuss your problem in chat or meta if the person has been causing legitimate problems. Otherwise, get over it or take your enmity elsewhere.
11. I don't like this question, but I can't give any rational reason why. Not a reason to downvote. Just walk away and leave it alone.
12. I don't think this deserves an upvote. Not a reason to downvote. You don't have to upvote or downvote every single question or answer. Just leave it alone. You also shouldn't vote only to cancel someone else's vote. The net score doesn't have to represent your opinion.

The reason that I posted this question is because it doesn't look like people are following these practices regarding downvoting. Of course, it may be that ELU doesn't want to work the way that I have described, which is fine. But I probably don't want to be a part of the community in that case, so I want to know people's opinions.

Answer 1

Alenanno posted even while I was typing. We have some overlapping viewpoints.

From a comment here:

To clarify: by "good", I mean "is encouraged here" (that's the gist of what upvoting is supposed to mean, yes?), and by "bad", I mean "is unacceptable behavior here" (that's what downvoting is supposed to mean, yes?). I have see several posts flipflop up and down with votes. So it seems the voting users either don't know what is supposed to be on this site or they are misusing the voting system.

Upvotes and downvotes can mean different things to different people. Heck, downvotes can mean different things to me, even!

The user Hugo once took the time to post this graphic in a meta question, which depicts the mouseover tool tip for the downvote button:

So, what does a downvote mean? It could mean:

• (a) the question is hastily presented
• (b) the question is poorly written, to the point where it's confusing
• (c) the question is not useful

That last one – "not useful" – is subject to interpretation; one man's trash is another man's treasure. I think this explains why we see some questions upvoted and downvoted: it's not "misuse" of the voting system, it's simply two differing viewpoints. Let's say someone asks a basic question about verb tenses:

What's the difference between the following constructions of present perfect:
- I've been waiting for you for seven years.
- I've waited for you for seven years.

Some might see this question, and be annoyed: There's no real difference at all! This is a waste of time – why is this even being asked here? There are plenty of basic grammar sites that explain verb tenses. Others may think: I've always wondered about this! I can't wait to see the answers!

Either way you think (and, by the way, this was a real question that got +3/-5), I tend to think the question is what I call hastily presented; in other words, it shows little to no research effort.

I sometimes downvote questions when my first reaction is, "Why are you asking us this? Can't you look this up yourself?" which is why I encourage users to include specific findings from their research. (If we regulars are all evil vampires, including such research is like putting garlic around the downvote button.) Let me offer an example:

BAD

What is the difference between a king and an emperor?

My answer? Probably a downvote, and comment: What did the dictionary tell you? (except, I'll bet someone else would've left that comment already, so I might just upvote their comment instead).

BETTER

What is the difference between a king and an emperor? I tried looking in the dictionary, but I couldn't really find much difference between the two words.

My reaction? Well, at least a dictionary was consulted – allegedly – but the O.P. still hasn't told us what was found, nor done a good job of explaining why this would interest the community as a whole. In this case, I might not downvote the question, but, in a debate on meta, I'd still probably side with the downvoters.

BEST

Oh, fiddlesticks, I won't even try to duplicate the question here, I'll just provide a LINK to Question #63039 instead.

My reaction to that? I think it's a piece of art; I'm one of the 40+ upvoters. It follows this basic formula:

1. Let me explain why I'm asking this question.
2. Let me ask the question.
3. Let me tell you what I found when I tried to find the answer myself.
4. Let me explain why I'm still confused.

Note, too, the reaction by this so-called "negative community": 11 answers in less than 48 hours – three of which racked up well over 10 votes – plus more than 40 upvotes on the question itself.

As for the rash of recent downvotes being discussed on meta? I double-dog dare one of our discouraged, downvoted O.P.s to frame a question that well, and see what happens.

---

Footnote to Rachel (who I believe did ask a very well-presented question recently): Even the emperor/king question got two downvotes, which shows that you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Answer 2

Downvoting without offering feedback is not a nice or effective solution to the stated problem.

Sure it is. Or rather, it's part of the solution. The problem is complex - expecting one tool or tactic to be the primary or only solution would be naive.

So you describe a situation where very knowledgeable folks find themselves faced with trivial and poorly-asked questions, lazy and incorrect answers...

Part of the solution is education - this is where commenting has its role. Help folks learn what they're doing wrong, and they'll do better as a result.

Part of the solution is simply separating the wheat from the chaff, so the experts can chew on that good, good grain without choking. This is where voting comes into its own - by helping to rank posts according to their perceived quality, you can help separate those that are worth reading from those that aren't.

In summary: commenting is primarily for the benefit of the author; voting for the benefit of other readers. The effective use of both is critical to a healthy site. If you can't make effective use of one, then use the other - and respect that others may do the same.

Answer 3

You said

It is a message from the community that they are doing something unwanted.

Actually no. It's the evaluation of a single user, not the community. If, at the end of the day, the balance is positive (you had 6 upvotes and 3 downvotes), there are more people that liked your question. And it's not doing about "something unwanted".

I can downvote your question (I never did, I'm just proposing example reasons) because there is low research effort, because I think your question is not fit for the site, or even because I wanted to. You'll always meet that kind of people, everywhere.

About your question: it's the perfect example of a borderline question that gained quality because it's full of detail and research. I think you did a really good job with it. If your question had less detail, it would have been closed. I probably would have voted too. Some people think it's still not good for the site (hence the downvotes), but look, it has 6 upvotes. The community did give you positive feedback.

I've received my share of downvotes too and they won't be the last ones... I just kept on posting.

I am a moderator on Linguistics SE and you said there were 0 Q's with negative scores. I think this site receives much more poor quality questions than we do. I'm not saying there might not be some bad tendency to downvote everything, rather I'm saying that it's not all "bad tendency". There are also bad questions.

You also said

It's disagreement about what is a good and a bad question, or it's abuse of the system.

It's not abuse, as far as we know, some people downvote, others upvote. It's the system. But you're right: it's disagreement. We cannot all agree on a certain thing. Many users have complained to me saying that their question shouldn't have been closed. It's normal, we all have a mind each. And while I understand that you wished for all upvotes and no downvotes, after all it's good that there is disagreement. It means that the users judge independently.

Now, how to address the bad tendency? Well, you can't force others to do something but you can set a trend. When you see poor quality questions, go comment. When you see a good question (for you) that is being downvoted, you could ask "why is this question downvoted? I think it's good because A and B"... Some banal and stupid ideas, but it's just to get my point across.

Hope it helped... If I forgot something, let me know in a comment. :)

Answer 4

Please see this answer for comparative data on how ELU stands up to the other 89 SE sites. Here are the ten SE sites with lowest means, sorted on mean then median, ascending — notice how we are #8/90 in that ranking:

    Site                              Min  Max    Mean  Median  Stdev  Mode
 ================================================================================
 1. SharePoint                         -4    1   -0.02   0.0    0.62   46 × 0
 2. WordPress                          -1    2    0.00   1.0    0.45   43 × 0
 3. Server Fault                       -2    1    0.04   0.5    0.49   41 × 0
 4. Stack Overflow                     -2    2    0.08   0.5    0.59   41 × 0
 5. Game Development                   -8    9    0.14   0.0    2.33   17 × 0
 6. Drupal Answers                     -1    2    0.14   0.5    0.49   43 × 0
 7. Web Applications                   -4    2    0.16   0.5    1.30   23 × 0
 8. English Language and Usage         -5   14    0.18   8.0    3.34    8 × (-2, -1)
 9. Super User                         -2    3    0.20   0.0    0.72   36 × 0
10. Meta Stack Overflow               -14   19    0.30  -5.0    5.23   12 × 0

What you’ll notice is that all the big sites have lower means than we do, and that we have a much higher median than they do.

What you are noticing is probably our (currently-)unique mode. On the other hand, look at the very high mode-zero sites, where the overwhelming majority of their questions are sitting at zero.

If you look at the full dataset, we are only #12/90 when ranking by the lowest minimum;, meaning that 11 sites have lower minima than we do.

And when ranked by maxima, we come in at #17/90, with only 16 sites having higher maxima than us.

Apart from the mode, it is hard to find anything here that we stand out in. Maybe our high median, where we are tied for second place. But that sounds like a good thing, not a bad thing. A high median score looks good to me.

Answer 5

I agree with OP's saying that 'a popular justification for the large number of downvotes is that this site is meant for serious questions about English that are of interest to linguists and language experts. Only that it took me some time to realize it but watching legitimate posts being downvoted and closed, both mine and others, it has become clear what SE stands for. So, before it becomes complicated, I decided to request deletion of my SE account (which is not yet taken up by the moderators). After all, I am neither a linguist nor a language expert but luckily for people like me, there are other places to discuss English.