We vote a lot, and we vote up.
We have a narrow scope, which means there are people who can answer almost any question.
For some people, TeX and friends is almost a religion which they practise through this website.
Oh and I forgot to say: We vote a lot.
That's it I think.
PS: Did I mention that we vote a lot?
As Tom and David mentioned in the comments, we just upvote. Even if one feels the urge to downvote a question or an answer, we encourage different approaches, like leaving a comment to help make the content better or point crass errors, or simply do not upvote the content at all (but still pointing what is going on). A question or answer that shows effort ...
From very early on in the life of the site, there has been a presumption that voting should be a broadly 'positive' action. In particular, the community here have generally felt that for most questions voting below -1 isn't really desirable:
Please don't downvote below a score of -1, even if the question in its current form needs some improvement. A score ...
The post is by one of the top-users, I upvoted on trust.
Of course, I'm not saying that upvoting a post by a top user is wrong, if they are top users, it's very likely their posts are excellent!
I'm saying it is wrong if I upvoted only because the post is by a top user, without even reading it and without reading the other alternative answers.
The following statement
...a person who comes up with a good solution to a problem deserves more credit than the one who could not solve it.
is completely subjective and in my opinion wrong. It's very easy to ask a question (good or bad), but it's not always easy to write a good answer. The SE reputation system subjectively supported this approach by ...
I upvote. A lot. People vote for my answers, so I have to vote.
It's rare I don't upvote a question I answer to: as one of the moderators once told me, “if you deem a question worthy answering, then it's also worth a vote”.
I also vote answers: when they solve a problem in a “good way”, I think they deserve a vote. What a “good way” is probably depends on ...
The vote differential
Here are some unsubstantiated musings on some of the reasons for the vote differential.
The picture effect. Answers with pictures get lots of votes. Questions with pictures not so much.
The drive-by voter effect. Much of the traffic on the site is casual "drive-by" users who don't necessarily participate in the site actively but come ...
The post contains a stunning image (made in tikz, pstricks, picture mode, you name it) or a beautiful typographical object (a drop cap, a decoration, and so on).
Of course, I'm not against voting posts with beautiful images, but it should not be the only reason to upvote.
In addition to some of the observations that we vote a lot, I think there's another reason why that voting occurs: we value substantial answers over short one liners, and we tend to comment on answers to make them better rather than post a competing answer which is minimally similar to an existing one. See also Why do people answer in comments?.
The end ...
Sadly this is status-bydesign, even though it sucks.
Votes are accounted for at the time of casting, rather than at the end of the day. The only voting excluded from the per-day reputation cap of 200 are bounties and answer acceptance (+15).
What if I hit the daily rep cap and THEN get downvoted?
Downvote after hitting rep limit
Yes, we do vote a lot, but I think it's much more than that.
This community is very positive. We don't compete against each other (except perhaps playfully when we comment along the lines of "you beat me to the answer by 2 seconds"). We share our ideas freely. We encourage people: in how to get a solution that works for them, in how to write better ...
As stated in Idea behind "Your vote is now locked in unless this answer is edited", the motivation behind locking ones vote stems from an attempt to perturb possible "tactical down-voting".
Tactical down-voting suggests that users could vote down other competing answers in an attempt to possibly let their own answer be more visible (it is possible ...
Whenever I google a LaTeX issue, I end up on tex.SE. Now, that may have to do with my filter bubble, but it's also the best resources for LaTeX-related trouble, no questions asked.
So I routinely get here, find good stuff, and then of course upvote it.
I can only hope that this happens to many people, i.e. they land here, get help, and already have the ...
No. Accepting an answer is purely the decision of the person asking the question, and does not have to reflect what others feel is the 'best' answer. It simply is a way of saying that it is the answer which helped the person asking the question the most. Of course, this can mean that a question with a good answer never gets an accepted answer: that is '...
The SEDE queries suggested by samcarter (https://data.stackexchange.com/tex/query/888155/average-answer-score-by-tag) and me (https://data.stackexchange.com/tex/query/950955/) in the comments show the average answer score. The average, however, is very sensitive to outliers and therefore probably less useful to analyse 'your average question'. A more robust ...
I also like it that TeX.SE is welcoming, and I would like it to stay that way. In my view the way of implementing friendliness is as follows:
post personalized, constructive, actionable comments
if a previously unclear question is improved (with an MWE, description of how the result should look, etc.) then upvote
But upvoting a question that ...
Had they had been voting as much as we did then it would be an anomaly. We can easily cover their two pages with our very same top rows, compare them too:
Again, on behalf of a few other users, I vote for "mark as read" almost always. Because as mentioned, we don't care about the votes except those two misters you know who
I've gone through a number of changes in my behaviour on the site since I joined more than 5 years ago. The reputation bug is a big driver for any newcomer to the site. However, while receiving reputation is awesome, giving it (through voting) should be reciprocated. If a post adds value, cast your vote. If that addition is negative or useless, downvote; if ...
I try to keep it at negative one because negative answers are not assesed for being good. Hence it doesn't even make sense to compare a -5 voted q/a with a -1 voted q/a
A negative number is enough to draw attention that it is a crappy q/a and makes a point. -17 doesn't always mean the question is wrong. Sometimes the attitude rubs people the wrong way and ...
My logic is this: Suppose people found the answer relevant, and that the answer does exactly what I asked for and nothing else (and does not provide any additional perspectives, like explaining how the TeX kernel functions). Then it must be because they found the question relevant, at least to some extent. So why not up-vote the question, too?
I can tell ...
The question has no upvoted answers, so I choose one at random and upvote it in order to remove the question from the unanswered queue.
Such questions are automatically bumped up by the system from time to time in the hope the answers get a review and, perhaps, an upvote. On the other hand a careful review might reveal that none of the given answer is ...
The comment of marmot above notes a key aspect of this issue: many questions are badly asked, but still answerable, and the answers to such questions can be good, so the question does not deserve an upvote while the answer does.
A question can be bad because it lacks an MWE or the MWE is too long, which means that the answerer needs to spend time making an ...