Hot answers tagged

6

I tried editing a question with that tag, and I got an error about that tag not being allowed. I will check what happened, but it seems the software running Stack Exchange doesn't allow that tag in the questions. I have a vague idea of why this happens; I just need to verify it. As per Are tags with a name made of just numbers still allowed? this has been ...


5

Sorry about this; this was my bad. It was impacting an API. I verified that we didn't have pure numeric tags on some number of sites, but I obviously failed and didn't thoroughly check all of them, which is my error. I will find another approach for the problem that I was trying to fix. The code has already been reverted. Again, sorry.


4

As I mentioned in my comment, the edit was approved after the post was deleted, so it took a bit for the system to catch up. The system did notice that you were "owed" a 2-point rep reduction, but it simply hadn't taken effect yet. I forced a rep recalc on your profile, so you should see the accurate rep display:


4

It is by design: The number of suggested edits is cached, and its value is valid for every user who has the privilege of reviewing the suggested edit. Since that value is shown on every page of the site you visit, it makes sense to cache it to avoid running expensive queries for every user with that privilege.


4

You edited these and got +2 rep for each. The Community user deleted some closed and negatively voted questions yesterday, and these were among the casualties. As a result you lost the rep.


4

This isn't a realtime metric. It is cached and rarely exact.


3

This isn't a bug, it's a misunderstanding about what "positive question record" means. This is somewhat confusing, so you're not alone! It does not mean that the five questions you asked must have a positive score. It means that we count your total questions and subtract questions that are somehow "bad", including deleted ones. The formula for this is: (...


3

That value is heavily cached and rarely accurate. There is a Meta Stack Exchange question about this that explains more, but I can't find the canonical one right now. This one is close.


3

This is by design. Per the SE Meta answer for participation badges List of all badges with full descriptions: Yearling silver; awarded multiple times Have a reputation of at least (number of years since registration) × 200 + 1 (starting reputation) The number of years is not restricted to integers and increases continuously. For example, ...


3

There were only 4 questions with bad tag, I fixed them. Old tag should be destroyed automatically soon. Just by the way, I doubt if this tag is useful.


3

I'm pretty sure this isn't a bug - the only change you made was to add the theme-templates tag. That change is currently showing so the edit went through fine. As I understand it, once you have 500 reputation points, edits that consist of only re-tagging a post don't go into a review queue. So there's no reputation 'reward' for their acceptance. Update ...


2

That string isn't a valid URL, so it shouldn't be displayed as a link. The editor is processing it correctly per the rules for a valid URL, so it stops as soon as it hits the < character In such edge cases converting it to a code block as you did is the best course of action.


2

This is not a bug. If you look at the article, it says clearly that the author is "Beebee". "Beebee" is also the person who rejected the edit per the screen shot included in the question. AFAIK, if an author gets to review an edit and rejects it, as single review is all it takes to reject.


2

I believe this is because one of the users improved the edit instead of just approving it. There is an MSO question about this. I think this is what triggered the screenshot you posted: When the reviewer chooses to improve the suggested edit, they also choose whether or not to approve or reject this edit. The edit will be approved by default, but the ...


2

I have pushed a fix for this. Though it seems the old background image is cached. I just pushed another fix with the css cache breaker in it.


2

This is a global problem that is affecting some themes. Accoding to Top bar with double color?, the problem is fixed and will be live soon.


2

The site's topic setting used in the off topic description was set to drupal. I now changed it to Drupal. The settings are cached, so the change will not be visible immediately. Thanks for reporting it.


2

This will be fixed in the next build. Sorry for the inconvenience!


2

The privileges page has been completely redesigned since this was posted.


2

There's a known bug with badge awarding process that has affected the awarding of the Marshall & Excavator badges. SE is looking into the issue.


2

Shog9 told me: This is a side effect of All sites will be switching Ad Servers on October 1. A fix should be rolling out by 2017/11/27 or so.


2

It is because the number on the top shows the review that are available to everybody, while the numbers on https://drupal.stackexchange.com/review shows the ones you can take action on. In my case, the top number shows 16, but the review page shows I can make (9+4+2) 15 reviews. For example, suppose that the only available reviews are for the Close ...


2

The review indicator in the top-bar is not calculated on a per-user basis, but on a per-site basis. The top-bar indicator also won't always be accurate because it's cached. Source: Review counts in top-bar and /review don't match


1

Here is another "view" about your review count (= 26 at the time of your question): That number shows the total number of questions/posts/answers/edits (= items for short) that are waiting in any of the (6) review queues shown in the screenprint of your question. For any of these 6 review queues for which the "currently logged in user" has at least 1 item ...


1

I removed the offending styles (not sure when/why they were added, but should have been removed when it was redesigned). With you in the next build.


1

Confirmed on Chrome with Windows 7 Professional x64. Seems to be related to the div.bulleten-item-type CSS rule: Indeed, editing the width from 25px to 15px (shaving off 10px), fixes it: bulletin-item-type { width: 15%; } as per se: This seems to be a partial fix, however, since Chrome ignores width on the content:


1

I doubt there are bugs with that score, I've never seen any and I use it many times a day. If a question/answer previously had more or less up or down votes, one of the following could have happened: People have retracted their vote(s). One or more users have been removed, and the votes chalked off. To directly answer your question: How do I view vote ...


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