Timeline for New phenomenon: Rage Unaccepting
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
70 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 14, 2019 at 7:57 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Rob no for the first suggestion, "too complicated to be worth doing" for the second. | |
| Jul 13, 2019 at 13:51 | comment | added | Rob | Shawiz, on a more serious note it begs the question: "Should unaccepting after a certain amount of time (30-60 days) cost the answerer less than -15, possibly -10. Should unaccepts made within 10 minutes go into the 'Serial Voting Detector' and a decision made at the end of the day to allow the unaccepting but take the points from the unacceptor?". The question asker does have the right/privilege to choose the answer but where it's intended to be disruptive others shouldn't suffer, that includes the fact that new answers with few upvotes could be better (so an alt. choice is OK). | |
| Jul 13, 2019 at 10:36 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Rob if you accept an unaccept, you also accept its accept, and the accept before it. | |
| Jul 13, 2019 at 0:03 | comment | added | Rob | Should we accept your unaccept their unaccept, or should we unaccept your unaccept their unaccept; what if someone rage-accepted, would you accept that or is that too unacceptable? | |
| Jul 12, 2019 at 23:20 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 13, 2019 at 0:03 | |||||
| May 23, 2017 at 12:36 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:14 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| S May 7, 2015 at 21:04 | history | bounty ended | Shadow Wizard | ||
| S May 7, 2015 at 21:04 | history | notice removed | Shadow Wizard | ||
| S May 6, 2015 at 12:34 | history | bounty started | Shadow Wizard | ||
| S May 6, 2015 at 12:34 | history | notice added | Shadow Wizard | Reward existing answer | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 13:41 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 11:32 | history | edited | Martijn Pieters | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Apr 16, 2013 at 1:00 | history | notice removed | Shog9 | ||
| Apr 15, 2013 at 16:22 | history | notice added | asdf_enel_hak | Authoritative reference needed | |
| S Mar 16, 2013 at 17:41 | history | bounty ended | asdf_enel_hak | ||
| S Mar 16, 2013 at 17:41 | history | notice removed | asdf_enel_hak | ||
| Mar 12, 2013 at 9:06 | comment | added | asdf_enel_hak | @ShaWizDowArd meta.stackexchange.com/questions/166048/… | |
| Mar 11, 2013 at 20:11 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @asdf_enel_hak I think you got downvotes due to poor questions; can't see any pattern and as said in comment on your worst question "It's extremely unclear what is even being asked for here". No oscillation here. | |
| Mar 11, 2013 at 15:01 | comment | added | asdf_enel_hak | @ShaWizDowArd However this oscillation is due by "some" downvoters and i think it could not be reversible, their oscillation until "OP" being my self, edition issue of question, "is that all" :) what do you think | |
| Mar 11, 2013 at 7:37 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Doorknob he's now oscillating his reputation that's all.. | |
| Mar 11, 2013 at 7:13 | comment | added | asdf_enel_hak | @Doorknob i am "Looking for an answer drawing from credible and/or official sources." for stackoverflow.com/questions/6321702/… | |
| Mar 11, 2013 at 1:35 | comment | added | Doorknob | @asdf_en What is that, a bunch of sockpuppets' serial downvotes? What does that have to do with this? | |
| Mar 10, 2013 at 16:39 | comment | added | asdf_enel_hak | @Doorknob i.sstatic.net/84cSf.jpg | |
| S Mar 10, 2013 at 10:06 | history | bounty started | asdf_enel_hak | ||
| S Mar 10, 2013 at 10:06 | history | notice added | asdf_enel_hak | Reward existing answer | |
| Mar 4, 2013 at 8:43 | answer | added | Jirka Hanika | timeline score: 15 | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 14:16 | answer | added | LessPop_MoreFizz | timeline score: 27 | |
| Feb 4, 2013 at 10:24 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @LinusKleen you're totally right, it was already suggested to add such a link and I've even came up with a nice mockup. Until this is done, it's yet another cool hidden feature like many others. | |
| Feb 4, 2013 at 9:56 | comment | added | J. Steen | So. That answer's that. No reasonable person would do this. | |
| Feb 4, 2013 at 9:41 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | @Doorknob: You don't have to spam the same image all over this question. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 22:50 | comment | added | iDev | Mad, mad world. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 18:20 | comment | added | BЈовић | meta.stackexchange.com/a/22931/155223 | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 17:12 | comment | added | Doorknob | i.imgur.com/J9xm0qt.png | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 16:30 | comment | added | Daniel Fischer | @LinusKleen Without manually entering the URL, I think you need somebody else to link it. There's no link on the page to it. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 16:23 | comment | added | Linus Kleen | OT: I've been active on SO for quite a while now and it's the first time I've seen a post's timeline. How does one get there (without manually entering the URL)? | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 15:31 | comment | added | Bart | I think we might have to keep an eye on @J.Steen as well with his sinister thoughts....I might just pre-emptively flag him for some moderator attention. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 15:31 | vote | accept | Shadow Wizard | ||
| Feb 3, 2013 at 15:18 | answer | added | user50049 | timeline score: 91 | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:51 | comment | added | J. Steen | @ShaWizDowArd Point. But that may be too obvious. ;) Then again, this is all speculation. It does seem odd that a user that's been gone for eight months suddenly comes back to start the rage-quit process. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:49 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @J.Steen hard to believe that's the case especially now that accept rate is no longer displayed. Asking new silly question is more likely in such case. :) | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:43 | comment | added | J. Steen | @ShaWizDowArd Unaccepting leads to easy, dropped reputation and bad will, as does deleting your own topvoted answers. If you want to defame someone in a not-so-obvious way, that's how I'd do it. Maybe I'm just sinister that way. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:42 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @J.Steen interesting, but can't see any motive in such action by third party, innocent or malicious. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:42 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Bolt fair enough, guess this one is the first and a big edge case. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:28 | comment | added | J. Steen | I'm wondering - is there anything suspicious in the user's access logs? Maybe, just maybe, there has been access from a third party. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 14:08 | answer | added | Eliah Kagan | timeline score: 47 | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 13:19 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | @ShaWizDowArd: We do suspend users for mass-deleting or mass-vandalizing their own content in order to prevent further damage while we work out a solution that's less harmful to both parties, but that's all I'll say. No idea about mass-unaccepts. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:37 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Bolt cheers! Doubt he's the type to respond to chat, but worth trying. Just curious, can such actions lead to temporary suspension? | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:36 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | @ShaWizDowArd: Good thinking, I've done that now. If he does this again I might have to chat him up... | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:35 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Bolt isn't it better to undelete those top answers? | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:29 | history | edited | ЯegDwight | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:28 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | @Bart: Yeah, his last not deleted comment was in April, and even among the deleted ones his most recent was in May. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:22 | comment | added | Bart | @BoltClock'saUnicorn At all? Wow, not the talkative type then... | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:22 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | @Bart: He hasn't left comments in under a year. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 12:20 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | Actually, unaccepts are marked in the reputation history and our 15 points revoked, so the people who will notice this are those who had their answers accepted before, and among them those who check the user's activity. That said, I noticed this when one of my answers was unaccepted, but I didn't think to make a meta post about it. He has also deleted several of his top unaccepted answers in a short period of time. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 11:52 | comment | added | Bart | @ShaWizDowArd Yeah, it's a weird one. Not sure if it's an accept-rate removal side-effect, but strange nonetheless. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 11:23 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Bart looks like this, although usually rage quitter start by deleting or editing out all their posts. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 11:21 | history | edited | Shadow Wizard | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 255 characters in body
|
| Feb 3, 2013 at 11:19 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | @Arjan no, I don't think so. In such case he would have said something, somewhere. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 10:46 | comment | added | LittleBobbyTables - Au Revoir | Wow, I sure didn't see this outcome from removing the acceptance rate... | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 10:28 | comment | added | Bart | The particular user also seems to have left no comments in over two years...I guess this is all part of a bigger "cleanup".... | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 10:18 | comment | added | Arjan | Or someone who feels the community should select the best answer by voting, and does not feel the accepted answer should float on top. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:58 | comment | added | J. Steen | @Mysticial That's indeed not reasonable, that's just childish and unacceptable (har har) - about as childish as the people requiring people to have a certain accept rate before they'll deign to answer the question. ;) | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:57 | comment | added | Mysticial | @J.Steen Probably someone who's been pissed off at all the people complaining about his/her accept rate. Now it's time for "revenge". That said, I think this is unacceptable behavior - pun intended. | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:55 | comment | added | J. Steen | Odd behaviour. Why would anyone reasonable do that? | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:53 | answer | added | Mad Scientist | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:51 | history | edited | Shadow Wizard | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 120 characters in body
|
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:48 | comment | added | Mysticial | Wow... Yeah, that sounds like a problem... | |
| Feb 3, 2013 at 9:44 | history | asked | Shadow Wizard | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
