meta.codidact.com

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.

I would always claim that anonymous upvoting and downvoting are a crappy quality assurance method causing more harm than good in the long run due to unbased (or well based) accumulated hostility and would generally not even use it but if it is the only method to get communal feedback on a user's posts I would reluctantly use it.

It's a bit frustrating for me to check every Codidact website to learn how a given post of mine (or of another user) was received by the community. I'd prefer to have visit some single webpage that will show two tables per network website (one for questions and one for answers) with any post I have published in any website in the network (probably it will include a pager in case there are too many posts per table); From there, to easily know how many upvotes and upvotes each post got (if at all) and on the way, to know what is my "reputation points number" on the relevant network website.