Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

31
  • 131
    But then we'd have to suspend Community ♦ for all that cross voting. Commented Mar 15, 2012 at 11:57
  • 85
    +1 Completely agree. It's disorienting to click between tags or tabs and suddenly you lost 10 rep (or more) without any apparent way to reconcile what happened. Commented Mar 15, 2012 at 12:40
  • 67
    The points about votes being a valuable part of the data context of the system is a critical one. Without the voting, the entire system would be substantially less useful / valuable. One could even make an argument that the votes contributed by a user are often more important than the content contributed by that same user. Commented Mar 15, 2012 at 16:07
  • 52
    Note that, apart from votes, answer acceptances for deleted users are kept, though the 15 rep is not meta.stackexchange.com/questions/73886/… It all seems a bit inconsistent. Commented Mar 17, 2012 at 7:56
  • 17
    Related: Strange “unupvote” pattern across multiple users, in which Yoda lost 1,685 rep when a user was deleted... Commented Mar 17, 2012 at 19:04
  • 197
    It would make sense for two kinds of deletion, one with vote-removal, one without. If the user is deleted for good faith reasons (wants to leave the site, rage-quit, &c), then we keep the votes. If the user is an obvious sock/troll/etc, delete them. Commented Mar 28, 2012 at 13:40
  • 39
    Double-plus support this. Votes from accounts deleted for non-vote-fraud reasons should be attributed to @Community. Commented May 25, 2012 at 13:48
  • 45
    Just lost 100 rep and permissions when another user was removed. Illogical, please fix. Commented Jun 27, 2012 at 18:34
  • 8
    status-deferred this? Please? Commented Jan 22, 2013 at 17:21
  • 6
    Relevant new events: Wiping votes on deletion of high-rep accounts Commented Mar 22, 2013 at 14:28
  • 9
    That happened to me today and it's totally unreasonable and annoying... Commented May 14, 2013 at 18:27
  • 29
    This should be treated just like the real world whereby "Bob" brings value to a company before his departure or retirement. Do we then discard all contributions that Bob made to the company during his tenure upon his exit? Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Commented Aug 29, 2013 at 5:57
  • 12
    @Synetech: «The user is gone, as are their posts» No, they're not. The posts are licensed to SE, Inc., and they persist. They may be soft-deleted in some cases, but useful contributions are nearly always preserved. Commented Dec 8, 2013 at 20:19
  • 10
    @Synetech If you request account deletion, only posts with a negative score are deleted. You don't get to remove all your content on deletion as you licenced it under the CC licence. Posts are often deleted for moderation reasons, but useful posts that follow the rules are generally not deleted, even if their authors would like to remove them. Commented Dec 8, 2013 at 20:33
  • 17
    I just lost 255 reputation on beer.stackexchange.com due to this. With the beer stack exchange still considerable small; this is a big deal, especially because the top members, myself included, only have around 1300 reputation or so. Not I'm down to 900. Commented Mar 11, 2014 at 0:21