Voting on questions is something that I think is really worth discussion in the context of Discourse. I have a bit of experience with SO-like sites 
and Iâd like to do a bit of thinking about whether votes are useful for questions on post-voting type topics here at all (for brevity, Iâm just calling these âquestionsâ from here on out).
You are correct that on platforms that are solely Q&A (e.g. Stack Overflow), there are specific things that question votes (up and down) are used for. In particular:
- indicating question quality or that you have the same question/can understand the need for such a question
- searching/sorting/filtering questions by score
- indicating the question is in/out of scope for the site
- hiding particularly low-quality content
- enabling deletion by non-moderator users
- rewarding/penalizing users for posting good/bad questions with reputation/karma.
As far as Iâm aware, these donât really apply to Discourse currently, whether using this plugin or not. I know the feature is relatively new but Iâm curious how many of these Q&A features are things youâd want to make use of in Discourse. On the surface, it seems like a huge paradigm shift from the current trust level system and other moderation practices.
If your main goal in adding these question types is to allow communities to easily create/host their own SE-style sites where the primary purpose is more structured Q&A rather than discussions, thatâs really interesting and Iâd love to hear more about it⌠but Iâve learned a lot in my time at SO that has led me to question some of its core functionality to the point Iâd outright discourage replicating many aspects of SO if I were building it from scratch.
When thinking about a hybrid system like a Discourse community running the post voting plugin would be, I donât honestly know whether voting on questions makes sense at all. I admit that I donât know a ton about the feature and how itâs implemented but I have poked around with it somewhat and read what posts I could here to learn about it, which has led me to this conclusion.
What value does question votes add in Discourse?
I understand the plugin has been official for less than a year and is likely still in flux. I wonât profess to be an expert in Discourse moderation, features, or scope by any stretch (feel free to correct any errors I make) but it seems that the status-quo uses different (and possibly better) solutions, which render many reasons for question scores unnecessary.
TL;DR - Read the stuff in bold.
| # | Feature | Use on SO | Use on Discourse | Useful? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Notifications for votes | Upvotes notify poster of reputation change. There isnât a Like feature on SO. | Votes do not create a notification for the asker but Likes do. | While itâs likely easy to add upvote notifications to Discourse, why have both? Likes are one of the primary reasons question votes seem unnecessary here. [1] |
| 2 | Vote impact on askers (reputation) | Reputation is how privileges are awarded on SO and usersâ reputation is a major aspect of their status. Earning rep from well-received questions is one of the only ways users who only ask questions can gain privileges. | There is nothing like reputation. Privileges are awarded through the trust level system, which emphasizes and rewards simply reading content for TL 1. Votes on Q&A style posts seem to count as Likes, which are absent from both question and answers. | The direct tie between post creation, reputation, and privileges is the aspect of SO I most wish to change. Users should have multiple avenues to earn privileges that donât require content creation. If users donât need question votes to earn TLs, they seem unnecessary. |
| 3 | Vote impact on askers (non-rep) | One aspect of the non-public, automatic SO recidivism system (that cannot be overridden by mods) relies in part on question score to block future questions from users who consistently post poorly-received questions. SO doesnât have a way to require preview of content before itâs live on site. | Moderators use tooling to manually silence, suspend or override the userâs TL rather than there being any automations. There are settings that can be used to require moderator review of new posts in some cases but arenât based on post reception. | Considering SOâs scale and prioritization of allowing anyone to ask questions, the use of automated question bans for users is understandable (though the system needs an overhaul [2]). Relying on existing TL-based post restrictions and use of flags makes question score unnecessary for user moderation. |
| 4 | Score impact on posts | Low-scoring questions are hidden from the front page and more easily deleted by trusted users or automations. Some flag types can delete the question if enough of them are received. All flags of the same type are weighted equally, regardless of who cast the flag. | Thereâs a robust extant system to automatically close, hide, and delete posts based on flags, which also draws moderator attention to flagged posts. Flags from users with good flagging history are weighted more than flags from users who do not. | The existing system seems incredibly well balanced. By using past flags to weight new ones, users are incentivised to be accurate in their flagging. In contrast, using un-weighted votes to hide/delete content can be misused and doesnât take past voting into account. Relying on votes to moderate posts is unnecessary in conjunction with the existing flagging system. |
| 5 | Question sorting/ filtering | Question score, answer count, accept status are clearly indicated in all question list views. Search can use question score to filter and sort results on user request. All topics are Q&A, so no syntax is needed to find Q&A only. Search includes syntax to return questions only. | Question score isnât shown in topic lists but solved status and response count is shown. Results can be sorted by Likes (which includes votes). Thereâs no way to return Q&A topics only. The in:first syntax seems like it would return questions only. |
Adding search syntax for post type (Q&A vs discussion and question vs answer/response) seems valuable, though tangential. (This feature request post to show question score on the topic list) could be useful but Likes could stand in for question score in topic lists or you could decline the FR and keep the UI as-is. |
| 6 | Upvote meaning | The question upvote hover text states âThis question shows research effort; it is useful and clearâ. The first half is up for debate and the second half is subjective and ambiguous. Users likely vote on questions for many reasons including, âI had the same question!â, which arguably falls under âusefulâ but subject experts may decide simple but common questions arenât useful (to them) and downvote. [3] [4] | Undefined. Thereâs no UI directions about when to vote and thatâs understandable since itâs a new feature and each community may want to encourage voting for different reasons than others. The familiar Like feature is absent in this topic format. While Likes may default to hearts only, communities can configure additional reactions. | Even in communities that manage to find consensus about when to vote, question vote reasons are frequently more subjective and broad than answer votes reasons, which almost always mean âthis is correctâ or âI agree with thisâ. Likes, particularly when communities add a variety of reaction options, can better explain why someone votes on a question than pure up/down votes. |
| 7 | Downvote meaning | Ask 10 people when to downvote a question on SO and youâll likely get 10 different answers, half of which will be âwrongâ and many would be better addressed by editing, flagging, closing, or commenting. Underuse of these features leads to askers posting on Meta to express confusion and frustration at their question being downvoted without explanation and asking that such votes be prohibited. [5] | Similarly understandably undefined. Most question issues can likely be addressed more effectively by using comments to point out actionable changes or recommendations, using the flag option on questions to DM the asker, or flagging for moderators. The default heart wouldnât make sense with the negative connotation of downvoting. | People hate getting downvotes, even when platforms go to great lengths to avoid letting users know they were downvoted. This is often more painful for question askers, who are looking for help and being vulnerable by sharing that theyâre stuck and frustrated at people they interpret as unhelpful or obstructing. Question downvotes can be the easy response but donât help askers improve. By leaning on other tools, you encourage communication rather than alienation. |
Adapting library features to your communityâs home
I recognize the urge to follow patterns established by existing platforms - particularly ones you helped build - but my big takeaway about communities on SE/SO is that most (new) users assume SE is more like a forum and frequently struggle with their first questionâs reception, particularly when it comes to closure and voting. Asking questions on SO is stress-inducing for many people⌠the internet is full of references to SO that tell them their question will either be completely ignored or harshly judged by self-appointed platform and subject matter experts who have arcane and capricious expectations for what qualifies as a programming question⌠and a lot of people donât want that.
What they have frequently stated they want was smaller, closer communities where they know people, can make connections and ask for help without being made to feel like an idiot. In a lot of ways, I think Discourse is that. By having a broader format that encourages open-ended and subjective topics while also supporting a more classical Q&A format, you allow communities to support each other the way they wish.
Even if SO were the best possible way to create and curate a knowledge library (itâs not), Discourse isnât (and shouldnât be) trying to be that kind of resource. Your homepage sells Discourse as âThe online home for your communityâ. When I want my kids to feel at home, I encourage and nurture their questions and make room for them to join in the conversation. When I take them to a library, I frequently have to remind them to be quiet and prevent them from treating the shelves like a jungle gym.
In my mind, question voting is something that may be necessary for a library but probably isnât for a home - and it may negatively impact how much people enjoy their home.
Armchair PMing time
This section is significantly less important than the giant table above, so if you havenât read that, go read it instead. The table explains how Iâm getting to this summary but will also reveal any issues due to bad info on my part - as a reminder, Iâm not a Discourse expert - I keep checking to make sure I donât write âDiscordâ instead.
- Remove question voting - If people really want something more like SOâs pure Q&A, it could be an setting but Iâd default it to off.
- Reinstate Likes on questions - give people a friendly way to react/support questions. Consider offering some default reactions that suit questions, both positive and negative.
- I understand wanting the consistency of either Likes or votes on the same topic but I think itâs worth mixing them and Discourse users are used to likes already⌠in factâŚ
- Investigate the value of Likes on answers in addition to votes and comments. Reactions can feel more friendly than votes and some people may want to indicate more than the binary up/down without writing a comment. If votes and likes are already being used to sort search results, maybe thereâs a way to use both when determining answer order - similar to flag scores in the review queue.
- Keep voting on answers - answer votes serve the primary purpose of ranking solutions to a single question and both up- and downvotes are vital, even if they may cause some stress.
I understand wanting to avoid mixing Likes and votes on the same topic. âŠď¸
Anecdotally, some users may overuse downvotes on questions with the goal of getting askers q-banned sooner, which can also make it harder to get unbanned. In such systems, itâs imperative to consider unintended consequences and find ways to minimize them. âŠď¸
I could give a Ted talk on question voting on SO, but Iâll say that many SO users seem to have forgotten the âlibrary of informationâ concept and the âshows research effortâ hover text has exacerbated that. A great library has all of the information. Itâs silly to refuse adding something to your library simply because itâs in the library two towns over. âŠď¸
Also, donât even get me started on âVoting is different on metaâ - though, since my solution is merging Discourse and Q&A, maybe itâd at least be on topic. âŠď¸
Regardless of what people say on SO, downvotes feel personal, even if theyâre not intended to be taken that way. âŠď¸