This was said in chat by many people, in many ways. I will repeat it here amplified for clarity: If the only reason you are coming to Server Fault is to gain REPutation, you have come to the wrong Stack Exchange site. Upvotes on Server Fault are very rare and precious things - We reward the intricate and interesting questions, and the technically elegant ...


After a question was recently closed the poster of said question started downvoting posts of everybody participating in the closure of his question. Is such behavior considered appropriate? No, it's not. Report it (like you did with this thread), and the mods will take a look. It's been a while, but I recall there being a suspension category for this ...


This question really is not useful as-is, not to the community, and not even to yourself. You are essentially asking us to choose a load balancing and/or high availability solution for your service, without providing any information about the service, and quite possibly without even having built a prototype of the service! This is not going to work. Every ...


It is a feature. Upvote is approval. No vote neutral. Downvote is disapproval. This gives an overall sense of how the Server Fault community and the wider Stack Exchange users feel about a particular candidate.


You received TWO downvotes. One on a question and one on an answer. You also received an upvote on one of those same posts. This isn't a pattern and you're up 1 reputation net. As for getting mod's attention, there's a "Flag" button next to every single post (both questions and answers) and every comment on the site. That's the best way to get a hold of a ...


You stuck your head above the parapet and were found wanting now people are reviewing your earlier works for similarly incorrect answers. Moderators have no control over or knowledge of the way that people vote. People are free to vote as they please. There are checks in place to ensure that any serial {up,down}voting that takes place is automagically ...


I down voted your question, simply because of the comments you made. I didn't believe what I was reading when I saw you respond to an answer with (and I can't remember exactly what you said), words to the effect of 'You liked my question as you've answered it, What is wrong with you, why didn't you up vote my question, I'm not doing this for nothing'. I ...


Just like serial upvoting, serial downvoting is detected and reversed. The last time I looked, the reversal was done daily, shortly after midnight UTC.


Voting is anonymous and should stay that way. Requiring a comment would prevent this, so this an extremely undesirable feature in my view.


I never see anyone complaining when they receive an up-vote without an explicit explanation... As Iain is fond of saying: "No one who needs to, reads anything least of all documentation." Many first time posters skip actually reading the the site introduction and the how to ask pages and that is unlikely to change. In that light a mandatory/automatic ...


I already commented on your question, and I'm not one of the downvoters. While I think the question is written reasonable (and thus should not be downvoted IMHO), I do believe that the question should be closed, because it is way too broad. We don't know your exact scenario. Any one of the solutions you posted can be used. Free service / money constraint? ...


The research the community asks of you is the research to answer your question, not to ask it. I freely accept that you've done enough research to find out what load-balancing options are generally available, but if you hadn't done that I suspect the question would look like "I need to know about load balancers, please help me" and would already have been ...


The downvotes were for now-deleted content. However, the question as it stands now looks just fine to me.


The vote detection script hasn't shown anything yet, but that doesn't mean it won't. I don't know how regularly the script runs, but it's at least once every 24 hours. If you haven't got your rep back in 24 hours and you still believe you've been done wrong, just put a quick update to your question to say you've waited 24 hours.


The tooltip, when you hover over the downvote arrow, says "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". That's the closest you'll get to an authoritative answer as to why anyone downvoted a question or answer, absent a comment from a downvoter. My thoughts on why I might downvote them, if I were in that sort of mood: "do ...


Don't worry about it. There are scripts in place to detect and reverse downvoting of that extent. (and it's not exactly subtle is it?) Check back again tomorrow and you'll see all the numbers back in green with "Serial Voting Reversal".


There's a vote-fraud detection algorithm that runs once (twice?) a day and will reverse those votes assuming that it's actually all from the same person - which seems pretty likely given the time frame.


I've read your question several times and don't understand what it is you're asking, to be honest I think it's NARQ. The technologies you are using are not those that we would typically use to administer a system. If you look at .net we have 59 people following it and 268 questions compared to stackoverflow which has 12k followers and 19k questions. ...


What the auto-script looks like and does - reverses the points on the next day. Seems somewhat exploitable.


The point value of a downvote is negligible compared to the rep increases you'll get through normal use of the site. There's been commentary throughout the life of the Exchange on how to get rid of downvotes, but they're an important part of how the site works, as a method of easy communication. Also, the point system exists to incentivize usage that aligns ...


I closed your question as off-topic for one simple reason: You posted essentially the same question on Stack Overflow and Server Fault. All you did for your question here was trim the code out (and included a link back to your Stack Overflow question in its place) - that doesn't substantially change what you're asking, and as others have pointed out ...


To add to Iain's answer, to make it to the second Election round, I believe the candidate needs to have a positive net vote count. That is, more people approve than disapprove of the candidate.


Your original question was about the difference you see when you do the same thing with and without ".net" involved. How is that a server issue? You have already stated that a raw request gives the correct result, so clearly everything is fine on the server end. Your problem is very obviously with your code, which makes it a coding question, which belongs on ...

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