-4

And maybe require a reason for the vote.

1
  • 3
    This is a fairly common concern with new users across the network. And it's perfectly understandable: what good is a downvote if you have no idea how to correct the problem? But I'd argue (and have argued) that downvotes are actually more productive as a form of criticism if they are anonymous and commenting is optional. – Jon Ericson Sep 18 '15 at 1:31
4

The purpose of voting is to provide a crowd-sourced ranking mechanism of questions and answers. Showing the identity of the voter may discourage honest voting based on the quality of the post and encourage the introjection of inter-personal favoritism and conflict into the voting apparatus. This has been suggested:

That was closed as a duplicate of a prior question that explains that anonymous voting is .

A requirement for comments to accompany down votes has also been discussed ad nauseam on the network.

There is now a reminder shown to <2k users encouraging them to leave a comment if they have something helpful to say. The crowd-sourced powers-that-be on Meta.SE have determined that a requirement is not a good idea. The reasoning is well summarized in a comment there by a user who later acquired a lot of diamonds. Please contribute to the Meta.SE Q&A if you have something to add to this discussion.

2
  • Thank you Susan. – user10231 Sep 18 '15 at 1:33
  • Interestingly, the 2k requirement to escape the DV reminder is the only reputation-based “privilege” I’m aware of that is not trumped by the ♦. – Susan Sep 18 '15 at 1:42

You must log in to answer this question.