Whilst voting is in general anonymous, the moderator team have access to some data about unusual voting patterns. I can see from that one case which seems to fit the description in the question. I have taken some action (which I am sure you appreciate I cannot give more details about), and will be monitoring this in the coming days.


We don't follow the Thanks removal rule. It is a SO thing. Some of us approve Thanks removing edits. Some don't. I don't. Some notes for future reference and responding to a hypothetical SO user arriving here. I'm not bothered with Thanks word. It's a word. Why don't we get equally bothered by those voting arrows next to the question or those colorful ...


I think (and m0sa's terse comment seems to back me up) that this happened because the question was migrated: the votes were migrated along with the question, but the view counter was reset.


The fact that egreg posted a better answer that you did doesn't mean that your answer is wrong. It's actually good, which is why people upvote it :) The system likes having more answers to one question, as long as they are not seriously wrong, non-answers or ridiculous. However, only the non-answers should be flagged and removed. It's then the person who ...


As the message box suggests, the votes are recorded, but never displayed. Note that we have a large contingent of users that have very little reputation (below 15) (actually every network has). These are often only visitors to the site who get what they want (or not) and then leave; of course, this could also include illegitimate users, so recording votes ...


It is a duplicate of Message for upvotes is misleading but I can't mark it as such because it is on a different SE--the global meta one.

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible