Return to Answer

Technical point: the SE code does not attach any significance to bounty reasons. It's used only to produce a canned text explaining the reason to the bounty. In particular, one can set a bounty to "reward existing answer" on a question without answers (as I just did).

Some reasons why I do not support the proposal:

1. It may result in random bounties or worse yet, in strategically placed bounties. Your answers get lots of upvotes today... use them or lose it... give +500 to some answers by your friends... and they'll return the favor when they hit the cap. I think this would distort the purpose of bounties.

2. Daily cap is reached not only when a user posted a bunch of brilliant answers; it can also be reached by posting a picture of Batman, and having the post linked to from some popular site. In cases like these, I think the extra reputation points should be lost, because they were not deserved to begin with.

3. Users who provide the best answers are not motivated by reputation, to the extent that it's sometimes hard to convince them to post answers as actual upvote-able answers. Conversely, I find that some rep-hunters are prone to posting mediocre two-liners as quickly as possible (Fastest Gun in the West Problem). If they stop doing that after hitting 200 points for the day, I consider that a good thing.

Technical point: the SE code does not attach any significance to bounty reasons. It's used only to produce a canned text explaining the reason to the bounty. In particular, one can set a bounty to "reward existing answer" on a question without answers (as I just did).

Some reasons why I do not support the proposal:

1. It may result in random bounties or worse yet, in strategically placed bounties. Your answers get lots of upvotes today... use them or lose it... give +500 to some answers by your friends... and they'll return the favor when they hit the cap. I think this would distort the purpose of bounties.

2. Daily cap is reached not only when a user posted a bunch of brilliant answers; it can also be reached by posting a picture of Batman, and having the post linked to from some popular site. In cases like these, I think the extra reputation points should be lost, because they were not deserved to begin with.

3. Users who provide the best answers are not motivated by reputation, to the extent that it's sometimes hard to convince them to post answers as actual upvote-able answers. Conversely, I find that some rep-hunters are prone to posting mediocre two-liners as quickly as possible (Fastest Gun in the West Problem). If they stop doing that after hitting 200 points for the day, I consider that a good thing.

Technical point: the SE code does not attach any significance to bounty reasons. It's used only to produce a canned text explaining the reason to the bounty. In particular, one can set a bounty to "reward existing answer" on a question without answers (as I just did).

Some reasons why I do not support the proposal:  

1. It may result in random bounties or worse yet, in strategically placed bounties. Your answers get lots of upvotes today... use them or lose it... give +500 to some answers by your friends... and they'll return the favor when they hit the cap. I think this would distort the purpose of bounties.  

2. Daily cap is reached not only when a user posted a bunch of brilliant answers; it can also be reached by posting a picture of Batman, and having the post linked to from some popular site. In cases like these, I think the extra reputation points should be lost, because they were not deserved to begin with.  

3. Users who provide the best answers are not motivated by reputation, to the extent that it's sometimes hard to convince them to post answers as actual upvote-able answers. Conversely, I find that some rep-hunters are prone to posting mediocre two-liners as quickly as possible (Fastest Gun in the West Problem). If they stop doing that after hitting 200 points for the day, I consider that a good thing.  

Technical point: the SE code does not attach any significance to bounty reasons. It's used only to produce a canned text explaining the reason to the bounty. In particular, one can set a bounty to "reward existing answer" on a question without answers (as I just did).

Some reasons why I do not support the proposal:

1. It may result in random bounties or worse yet, in strategically placed bounties. Your answers get lots of upvotes today... use them or lose it... give +500 to some answers by your friends... and they'll return the favor when they hit the cap. I think this would distort the purpose of bounties.

    

2. Daily cap is reached not only when a user posted a bunch of brilliant answers; it can also be reached by posting a picture of Batman, and having the post linked to from some popular site. In cases like these, I think the extra reputation points should be lost, because they were not deserved to begin with.

    

3. Users who provide the best answers are not motivated by reputation, to the extent that it's sometimes hard to convince them to post answers as actual upvote-able answers. Conversely, I find that some rep-hunters are prone to posting mediocre two-liners as quickly as possible (Fastest Gun in the West Problem). If they stop doing that after hitting 200 points for the day, I consider that a good thing.

    

Technical point: the SE code does not attach any significance to bounty reasons. It's used only to produce a canned text explaining the reason to the bounty. In particular, one can set a bounty to "reward existing answer" on a question without answers (as I just did).

Some reasons why I do not support the proposal:

1. It may result in random bounties or worse yet, in strategically placed bounties. Your answers get lots of upvotes today... use them or lose it... give +500 to some answers by your friends... and they'll return the favor when they hit the cap. I think this would distort the purpose of bounties.

    

2. Daily cap is reached not only when a user posted a bunch of brilliant answers; it can also be reached by posting a picture of Batman, and having the post linked to from some popular site. In cases like these, I think the extra reputation points should be lost, because they were not deserved to begin with.

    

3. Users who provide the best answers are not motivated by reputation, to the extent that it's sometimes hard to convince them to post answers as actual upvote-able answers. Conversely, I find that some rep-hunters are prone to posting mediocre two-liners as quickly as possible (http://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/9731). If they stop doing that after hitting 200 points for the day, I consider that a good thing.

    

Technical point: the SE code does not attach any significance to bounty reasons. It's used only to produce a canned text explaining the reason to the bounty. In particular, one can set a bounty to "reward existing answer" on a question without answers (as I just did).

Some reasons why I do not support the proposal: 

1. It may result in random bounties or worse yet, in strategically placed bounties. Your answers get lots of upvotes today... use them or lose it... give +500 to some answers by your friends... and they'll return the favor when they hit the cap. I think this would distort the purpose of bounties. 

2. Daily cap is reached not only when a user posted a bunch of brilliant answers; it can also be reached by posting a picture of Batman, and having the post linked to from some popular site. In cases like these, I think the extra reputation points should be lost, because they were not deserved to begin with. 

3. Users who provide the best answers are not motivated by reputation, to the extent that it's sometimes hard to convince them to post answers as actual upvote-able answers. Conversely, I find that some rep-hunters are prone to posting mediocre two-liners as quickly as possible (Fastest Gun in the West Problem). If they stop doing that after hitting 200 points for the day, I consider that a good thing.