8
$\begingroup$

It seems clear to me that the OP who asks a question will accept an answer they feel most useful, thereby implying that the answer was helpful, which is equivalent to upvoting it. Is there a difference in reputation (for the answerer) between simply accepting an answer, and upvoting AND accepting it?

If an accept is worth +15 and an upvote is worth +10, some answerers will receive +25 if the OP does both, but some only get +15 if the OP only accepts. Is there a way to equalize all this out?

Is it just general etiquette for OPs only accept and NOT upvote, leaving it the responsibility of the OP to follow etiquette? Or is the OP's upvote not worth anything if they accept in addition?

$\endgroup$
14
$\begingroup$

Upvotes are worth +10 and accepts are worth +15. Upvote rep is still awarded when a user accepts, so an upvote accept is +25.

In general, users upvote any post they find worthwhile. You are right in assuming that most users upvote answers they accept, and that it is widely considered a douchey move to accept without upvoting. ("If my post wasn't worthwhile, why was it accepted?") There are times when this can be explained innocently, though, for example when the asker has already given away all his votes for the day.

If this happens to you, don't be discouraged- just think of it as counting towards your Unsung Hero badge and keep on movin'.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Ok thanks. I was under the impression that it was normal to accept without upvoting. I guess all this time I was unknowingly being a douche : \ There needs to be a manual for this sort of thing. $\endgroup$ – chharvey Aug 5 '13 at 4:51
  • $\begingroup$ @TestSubject528491 Etiquette can be a complicated thing. It's only one upvote, though. I doubt anybody is all that furious about it. $\endgroup$ – Alexander Gruber Aug 5 '13 at 4:55
  • $\begingroup$ They need to make accepts worth +25 and then make it impossible to upvote after accepting (and equally impossible to accept after upvoting unless undoing the upvote first). That way the action of saying "your answer is right" is regulated, reputation-wise. $\endgroup$ – chharvey Aug 5 '13 at 4:55
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ I've also seen instances where a user accepted but was unable to upvote because they lacked the 15 points of reputation needed to do so. $\endgroup$ – Will Orrick Aug 5 '13 at 4:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @TestSubject528491 I believe the reason it's laid out like this is that upvotes count towards the daily $200$ reputation limit, but accepts don't. For example, if I answer a question, get $20$ upvotes, then you upvote and accept my answer, I still get +15 rep from your accept, but the +10 is lost to the rep cap. Letting accepts be worth +25 would allow the rep cap to be exceeded more profoundly. $\endgroup$ – Alexander Gruber Aug 5 '13 at 4:59
  • $\begingroup$ @TestSubject528491 You can still go through your history and upvote all the answers which you have accepted! $\endgroup$ – user1729 Aug 5 '13 at 9:22
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @user1729 I spent all last night doing just that :$ $\endgroup$ – chharvey Aug 5 '13 at 17:24
  • $\begingroup$ @TestSubject528491: It'd be convenient if the software would automatically give an upvote to any post you accept, if you haven't already done so. Then again, I can see some complications with that: for example, what to do if the answer is later unaccepted? (You can unaccept or re-accept an answer any time, but upvotes become irrevocable after five minutes unless the post is edited.) Also, there'd be no more unsung heroes. :) It would be kind of nice, though, if you at least didn't need 15 rep to upvote answers to your own questions. $\endgroup$ – Ilmari Karonen Aug 11 '13 at 14:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .