-4

Sorry that this is a new question rather than an edit (I couldn't locate the one I'd just posted!) but, I know from reason, the disliker of my many recent questions didn't read the full questions but based his dislikes on the titles. Can these dislikes be removed, please? I know that this is the case, because they were all 'disliked' within an unrealistically short space. The actual questions are fine- the titles may perhaps imply humour? Maybe he thought I was taking the micky? Either which way, the downvotes are not deserved (please feel free to read said questions) and having all my (important) queries downvoted as you scroll down the page may damage my chances of other people taking an interest in answering them as they have been devalued. But they are not opinion-based, can be answered, are researched and our clear in what they're asking. What more must I do?!

  • 3
    The downvotes are not mine, but I do kind of understand it. You asked a sequence of very similar questions, which are somewhat whimsical and rather hard to answer well. They might be interesting topics to discuss over a drink in the pub, but they're not terribly well suited to the format of this site. – lonesomeday Jan 12 '14 at 19:55
  • 1
    Many of your questions are about joy in heaven. There is obviously something about that topic which puzzles you, and yet by asking so many questions I think it makes it harder to pin point what that might be. My guess is that you are making a lot of questions because the answers you are getting are not satisfying to you. Rather than creating more questions, I think it would be more useful to edit one of your old questions until it is a really good one that gets to the heart of whatever is puzzling you. If you want help to edit it I'm sure there are many here who would love to help. – curiousdannii Jan 13 '14 at 15:14
  • Thanks. You're bang on though I think the question I'd like to ask is actually quite simple: 'What (good) evidence is there that there is joy way beyond what we experience now, in heaven? And are things that entertain us (provably) here 'sunbeams' of that ultimate joy? The reason my questions aren't working (I think) is because there is no evidence. I hope you understand why, if those things are true, I am so keen to find out and hope my repetition hasn't been too annoying. – Sehnsucht Jan 13 '14 at 16:52
  • 1
    Repetition doesn't belong on stack exchange sites - we close questions as duplicates after all. Your questions have been subtly different though. I'd recommend cutting them back really simple, even to a single sentence like you just did. I think you'll find there is evidence, both of what Christian theologians have said over the years and in the Bible. – curiousdannii Jan 13 '14 at 22:21
  • I think this question is good, it's short and easy to understand: christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/24408/… Would you be willing to close all the other questions which are asking the same thing and focus on that one? It should be edited to include the quotes from Lewis and Dekker. – curiousdannii Jan 13 '14 at 22:27
  • Thanks. Trying to close the others- the ones with replies won't budge. – Sehnsucht Jan 14 '14 at 14:27
  • It's funny that this question is getting dislikes. Gotta love irony! – Sehnsucht Jan 14 '14 at 14:35
  • I made an edit to your question (pending approval.) In general concise is better. All the stuff you added yesterday just made it more confusing in my opinion. – curiousdannii Jan 15 '14 at 14:05
  • Your last paragraph could be considered the basis of an answer, if you wanted to do that. You'd have to explain what Biblical texts make you think the idea doesn't make any sense. – curiousdannii Jan 15 '14 at 14:06
5

Let's start with the basics

  • If the votes were indeed targetted and all by the same person, they will likely be rolled back by an automatic script that runs nightly to prevent exactly this kind of abuse.

  • Manually removing votes is outside the powers of moderators, the SE community team has the capability to do this, but it is rarely invoked and only in instances where there is more subtle targetting that the script cannot deal with.

  • The system encourages question downvotes. They don't cost any reputation and are in fact intended to be more prevalent than answer downvotes. The rationale for this is here.

In light of these two things, we're going to assume that there is nothing amiss in this case. The only real thing I can tell you is not to sweat it. It might seem like a big deal right now, but if there is something wrong, then the script will take care of it.

Don't let a few downvotes bother you, people are free to vote how they want. We don't tell people how to vote (we really can't do that, not in any meaningful way). Sure it would be nice if people all voted in a way that made sense, and only voted on post content and judged the whole post for it's merits. But in truth, people don't do that.

However, don't lose heart. Here are some good reasons to shrug and keep moving

  • Downvotes matter little with respect to reputation. 1 question upvote nullifies 2.5 downvotes, one answer upvote nullifies 10 of them. So as long as you get one upvote for every few downvotes, your rep gain will almost always be positive. Even people who write garbage here have experienced significant rep gains.

  • Most people don't vote capriciously (At least not with downvotes). Most of the time people put a lot of thought into their downvotes. I'm likely to upvote anything that's good (as long as I see it and am in a voting mode, which I haven't been doing as much lately). MOST people think hard before they downvote, a lot harder than if they don't.

All these words to say, don't sweat the small stuff. And a few random downvotes (Even if targetted), is small stuff.

  • Ok, thanks! (I realise it's small, just wondered if these downvotes are always 'sound' (they are vey easy to get- mind you, that's probably my fault!) – Sehnsucht Jan 12 '14 at 18:56
3

You aren't getting "likes" and "dislikes" you're getting upvotes and downvotes.

This isn't pedantry (although you really should use the correct terms)... keep in mind that a downvote is defined as "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful," not "I don't like this question."

I don't know about anyone else, but I find that jocularity and repetition makes your questions much less clear than they might otherwise be. I wasn't entirely sure what you were getting at the first couple times you asked about how joyous Heaven is, but after your 6th or 7th version, I stopped paying attention - to me, if you need to ask a question so many different ways, you really need to focus it a lot more.

Now you're asking a lot of questions about Platonic Forms, and I think they suffer from the same problems: you're asking the same question multiple times, or you're looking for a discussion and not actually asking a question, e.g. Does Platonism have a denomination/group/following within Christianity?

What more must I do?!

Ask questions that are clear and complete in the first place and don't keep asking variations of it over and over. If you think of some additional angle that you want to work into your question(s), you can always edit it.

  • Thank you for the honest feedback. I apologise. I do look for answers rather than discussion. I'm not an expert so I was unaware that asking for a denomination that follows Plato was anything other than a question warranting a simple answer. I find it frustrating that simple answers are so hard to come by (is there evidence for more joy in heaven than Earth- such a simple sounding question!)but I am sorry if my repetition is an annoying experience. It's because the answers do actually matter to me. – Sehnsucht Jan 14 '14 at 23:21
  • IMO, you're doing it again with 4 questions today about infallibilty... Your question about Bishops and the one about documents being infallible show that you don't understand how it works, so I'd suggest you spend a bit of time researching and trying to understand it, then ask more focussed questions, instead of a series of "is this infallible?" "why isn't that infallible?" questions. – Ward Jan 17 '14 at 19:38
  • They are different questions though. I've been doing research- way too much (I'm getting square eyes in front of this screen). Their all 'themed' because their helping me understand the Catholic faith. I may be misunderstanding the purpose of this site but surely it's for such research? We are only allowed to ask questions that can be answered which seems to imply the answers must pre-exist (as opposed to opinion); most questions here could be answered via research. I take on board your helpful comment on repetition but honestly feel there was nothing wrong with my questions today. Sorry. – Sehnsucht Jan 17 '14 at 21:48
  • another reason for today's repetition of 'infallibility' is simply (whilst they are not of the same content) the answers require 'official' parts of Catholicism rather than opinion. – Sehnsucht Jan 17 '14 at 21:56

You must log in to answer this question.

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