There is a display bug which causes the number of badges to be shown incorrectly. Here is an example from Are there any disadvantages of TeX being Turing complete? where the number of bronze badges is displayed as "32" not "322":

I doubt that this is intended behavior (does not happen on SO with Jon Skeet for example)

Here's another bad example (by doncherry):

  • 2
    (For clarification for people who don't immediately see the bug) Martin Scharrer has 322 bronze badges. I get the bug as well (Firefox 8.0 on Linux Mint).
    – Jake
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 7:20
  • For this specific example, I don't get the bug with FF12.0 on Win7-64, but I remember seeing similar things. @soandos: Which browser on which OS are you using?
    – doncherry
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 7:27
  • Confirmed with Opera 11.64 and Opera 12 (beta) on Windows 7.
    – diabonas
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 8:39
  • Also I have the normal behavior (322 fully printed) with Win7-64, FF 12 (same as @doncherry).
    – percusse
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 10:29
  • LOL :D I'd call it the 'too-many-badges-to-display' bug! Clearly the badges are 'out-of-the-box'. Even the end of the '2' in '32' is slightly clipped.
    – Count Zero
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 10:50
  • @doncherry, Chrome 19
    – soandos
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 16:39
  • This reminds me on the impending issue I mentioned at chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/41?m=4490605#4490605, also see the second image a few messages down. ;-) Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 18:43
  • 4
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this can no longer be reproduced. Flair now wraps rather than being hidden.
    – Werner Mod
    Commented Jan 13, 2016 at 18:39

2 Answers 2


The line with the bronze badges is getting clipped if it is too long. The HTML code of the website contains the full number "322" which is clipped here to "32". If you look closely to the displayed "2" you see that it gets a little clipped as well.

The CSS settings used to style each site is different from SX site to SX site, so e.g. SO seems to not be effected. Therefore the responsible CSS setting should be found and changed in order to fix this.

I now found the responsible CSS setting. There is a overflow: hidden as part of the user-details:

.user-info .user-details {
    float: left;
    margin-left: 5px;
    overflow: hidden;
    white-space: nowrap;
    width: 145px;
  • Looks good. I will mark it as correct when the bug is fixed
    – soandos
    Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 19:53
  • 1
    @soandos: I notified one of the SX designers about it now. It might be fixed soon. Commented Jun 1, 2012 at 20:08
  • 2
    @MartinScharrer: Perhaps they'll look at some of the other design problems as well ...
    – doncherry
    Commented Jun 2, 2012 at 10:24
  • 2
    Another idea: shorten 322 to 3h. Nobody seems to count badges by one when there're hundereds. (Maybe apply this rule only when both bronze and silver are at least 100?)
    – yo'
    Commented Jul 7, 2012 at 15:10
  • The bug is still active... @soandos
    – ppr
    Commented Dec 15, 2013 at 15:02

While I totally acknowledge that truncating the user info card is not optimal, we have to adapt it to many different designs.

It is a common assumption in our design that this card has a fixed width: hence, the overflow: hidden.

  • 3
    Maybe hide the bronze badges if they don't fit in? Because the current version seems to be the worst option :-/
    – yo'
    Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 14:15
  • One could even hide all badges at least for editors of questions/answers. They're not really important information. In fact I never have cared for the number of badges anyone has. To me it is quite useless information. If I want to know about the badges someone has I go to their user profile anyway
    – cgnieder
    Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 22:35
  • 2
    Sorry, but I find this very far from being an answer. It's just a comment saying: “We don't have time for fixing this obvious bug”. You don't want to fix it? Fine, but, please, don't say “I acknowledge it's not optimal”, which is simply ridiculous.
    – egreg
    Commented Oct 8, 2014 at 20:48
  • 1
    @egreg I don't even understand this answer. If that is so, why doesn't the bug manifest on all sites - if it is a problem caused by a 'one-size-fits-all' measure?
    – cfr
    Commented Dec 5, 2014 at 3:32

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