There is a post in Meta.SE that is seeking some volunteer sites to test an adjustment of voting privilege. There are a few changes, but the highlights are.

What would change for sites participating in this test?

There are three main privilege changes happening here as part of our test:

  • Reputation required to cast upvotes is changing from 15 to 1
  • Reputation required to cast downvotes is changing from 125 to 1 The 1
  • reputation cost to downvote answers will be removed

We will notify logged-in users with <125 rep to let them know that they can vote with a popup.

To understand motivations for new downvoters, the first few downvotes from a <125-rep user would require them to explain their downvote - this information will not be posted anywhere, but will instead be collected by our research team and bucketed into categories so that we can better understand reasons people downvote.

Since GenAI.SE is already an experiment site, boosting participation and engagement (the goal of this testing) very much aligns with one of our current issues right now.

Should we volunteer?

  • is upvoting this question agreement For the proposal and downvoting Against it?
    – QHarr
    Sep 21 at 16:54
  • 1
    @QHarr I don't actually have the answer for that. I just wanted to ask. There is currently no community-accepted way of approval for how to conclude if a topic has reached what is called "community consensus". So, if I can decide, as an OP, I would choose the answers rather than the upvotes/downvotes/comments just because I can see the individual who agree/disagree with the topic along with their reasons. The community can discuss about each answer separately. Maybe convincing them to change their mind or just point out something they haven't thought about.
    – holydragon
    Sep 22 at 1:43
  • 2
    @QHarr This was posted as a question, not as a proposal. Someone should propose at some point, and the community should find a way to show their stand. The details of how the process should be conducted are in the Meta SE post.
    – Wicket
    Sep 22 at 17:04

2 Answers 2


The Meta Stack Exchange post clearly states that the CM Team is looking for 2-3 established sites. With due respect, and excuse me if I sound negative, this site is not yet established as it's only two months old.

GenAI Stack Exchange is the top site on the list of sites sorted by the Newest, so among the 182 sites, it is the least qualified as established, based on the site age. The below image shows a snapshot of the Technology category, but it's the same for the All category.

enter image description here

In my opinion, the number of questions and the average number of questions by day is low. Also, there are other "preferred" attributes, like the volunteer sites being larger, and having community moderators willing to work.... GenAI SE has no community moderators yet.

It's worth mentioning that GenAI has already lowered the reputation required to participate in Meta and that few days a ago it was posted Initial Moderator Election: Community Interest Check.

From If more users could vote, would they engage more? Testing 1 reputation voting on some sites, emphasis mine:

What is the test plan?

We want to find 2-3 established sites that are willing to volunteer for this test. Preferably, these will be larger sites that have moderators willing to work directly with the members of the Community Enablement team, the team dedicated to this project whose primary responsibility for the past year has been creating and improving moderator and community management tooling.


I agree with the explanation in Wicket's answer that GenAI is not an "established" site, but even otherwise, I do not think that it would be wise for the reputation threshold for voting to be reduced to 1.

Also if you look at the comments and answers on the Meta post for which you provided a link, it seems that not a single person is in favor of the idea, on any site.

  • 3
    eh, your second point isn't actually true, ;) strictly looking at the voting, it's not 100% negative, and when looking at votes from people without the rep to cast real votes... it's 2:1 for it, according to catija (keep in mind... this count isn't 100% accurate as it's not exactly 1 to 1 with normal voting.). That and I certainly support the idea, though not necessarily as something this site should volunteer for.
    – Kevin B
    Sep 23 at 3:50
  • What I wrote was "it seems that not a single person is in favor of the idea, on any site". That does seem to be true. Why are you saying that it's not?
    – Nike
    Sep 23 at 7:30
  • 7
    Arduino SE nomination posted on September 19 contradicts the claim of the second statement.
    – Wicket
    Sep 23 at 14:39
  • You picked the answer with the 26th highest score, and it was by a user with only 210 reputation on Meta.SE, and only 2566 reputation on Arduino, and pretty much 0 reputation on every other site in the network. The answer was also a joke, as it says "I did a survey of my local grocery stores, gas stations, restaurants, etc., to see if any of them accept SE reputation points as payment. I have yet to find any business where I live that accepts them." Two comments on the answer have a higher score than the answer itself, and the only positive-scoring answer on Arduino.Meta is against it.
    – Nike
    Sep 24 at 21:17
  • Rather than spend so much time writing a rebuttal like that to my rebuttal, you should think about improving your answer to convince the community, if you don't mind. Arguing to win a debate "against" me with that rhetoric line just makes you lose time, not because you can't win, but because if you win, you will get a pyrrhic victory.
    – Wicket
    Oct 6 at 16:34
  • @Wicket please make that the last time that you tell me what I "should" do. If you don't should on me I won't should on you.
    – Nike
    Oct 6 at 18:16

You must log in to answer this question.

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