What could be the reason for accepting an answer but not upvoting it? Situations:

  1. Accepting own answer - ok, no upvote on self-answers
  2. OP not having 15 reputation cannot upvote. I think that OP should be able to upvote answers on his/her questions even if he/she does not have 15 points yet.
  3. Uninformed or rude, does not care, got his/her answer, checks and leaves.
  4. Got some answer, but does not see it as good enough? What? ...should not accept.

I simply cannot think of valid scenairo (except self-answer) when you (OP) would accept but not upvote an answer. Should't the upvote be automatic on accept? (I mean automated by SE - feature request.)

EDIT: To make myself clear, I would like to propose, that accepted answers be upvoted automaticaly, except for self answers. This automatic upvote should not count towards daily limit (max 40). My reasoning is, that accepted answer is helpful and should not be accepted otherwise.

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ It has been requested since 2009, and declined in 2012. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andrew T.
    Commented Sep 23, 2018 at 8:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AndrewT.: Ahh, thank you, did't find it here, had no clue it is there. What now, should this version be deleted? \$\endgroup\$
    – user52292
    Commented Sep 23, 2018 at 17:19
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It's definitely 99% of the time the 3 & 4. I'd even go further and allow community to accept an answer for questions where the user doesn't care / doesn't exist anymore etc. There are countless such answered questions (e.g. on stack overflow). Another option could be to increase the reputation gain for accepted answers as if they were upvoted so the upvote had no additional effect but just increasing the vote count. \$\endgroup\$
    – t3chb0t
    Commented Sep 25, 2018 at 17:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ I came here because of pt2, but it would not be me if I did not try thinking about all the possibilities (I can think of). Second thing that happened was that OP (of post you can find in edit history) was unable to use chat, becase he did not reach 20pts. We have therefore used comments, because there was no other way. I have upvoted his question not because I though it was that good, but just to give him the damn reputation. Pt2 appears to be resolved this way, often. Pt3 is plague I would like CR/SE be cured of and Pt4 is something I have still difficulties to accept as valid. \$\endgroup\$
    – user52292
    Commented Sep 25, 2018 at 17:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @t3chb0t: I will not suggest posting another meta because you know better than me, but I agree with the community-accept-ability (and some questions deserve one answer: perfect). Increasing reps for accept is not a thing I will agree with, because OP can change mind (after new answer is posted) and together with my previous agreement, that would mean loss of reps, which I don't like. Automatic upvote when accepthing: yes, un-upvote on cancelling accept: no. \$\endgroup\$
    – user52292
    Commented Sep 25, 2018 at 20:20
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ nah, I'm not going to post another meta (on the SE homepage) because it's pointless anyway. SE is not listening to any feedback. Virtually everyone told them that the New Contributor label was a stupid idea and they've implemented it regrdles of what the community is thinking. Asking the community or posting suggestions is just a placebo. \$\endgroup\$
    – t3chb0t
    Commented Sep 26, 2018 at 10:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ As @t3chb0t Said, they often don't listen... there are inevitably more people always that will disagree with you than agree. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 2, 2018 at 12:50

2 Answers 2


Technical limitations:

  • Upvotes require 15 rep. Accepts do not.
  • Self-Answers can not be upvoted.
  • Every user is limited to 40 votes per day. Accepts are not subject to that limitation

Non-Technical side:

I don't think it's conductive to the culture of any SE site to speculate about the intentions of OP. But just for the sake of argument, let's go there:

  • User does not know / understand there are votes at all. They started interacting with the internet in places where votes were not a thing (random xyz forum). But they noticed that cool checkmark thing on some forum out there to mark the answer that solved a thread (e.g. MSDN)
  • User puts in the "accept" because the answer was helpful, but doesn't like the advice, so doesn't add a "like"
  • User dislikes the notion of votes
  • ...?

This list can probably be extended by quite a bit... Trying to understand votes is not really a helpful way to spend time, because unless you're explicitly told what a vote is and why it's that way, you can only guess the reasons behind a vote (or lack thereof).

  • \$\begingroup\$ And what about the automation of this (making accept=upvote without limitations except for self-answer)? Do you like the idea? "answer was helpful, but doesn't like the advice" ... well, I am really strugling to imagine this being valid. For me helpful=upvote, best=accept. If you don't like it then why accepting? \$\endgroup\$
    – user52292
    Commented Sep 21, 2018 at 20:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @firda There's the possibility that the question has been answered, but the answer isn't useful (the tooltip for upvote is "this answer is useful"). Maybe the question was a "Is this possible? How?" question, and the answer is "No". Question answered, but possibly not usefully. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 22, 2018 at 1:26
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Note also that the system will send you a notification after some time to say: "Have you accepted an answer on your question"...... and then some folk go back and accept an answer.... without voting. \$\endgroup\$
    – rolfl
    Commented Sep 22, 2018 at 14:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ @1201ProgramAlarm: I think that even "no, not possible" is useful, as long as it explains why it is not possible. Only such answer is acceptable. I will edit the question to make it clear that I am not only asking why people do that now, but if it would be good idea to make the system upvote accepted answer automaticly. \$\endgroup\$
    – user52292
    Commented Sep 22, 2018 at 15:02

Retrospective (self-answer)

I have created this question because of pt2 - OP not having 15 reputation cannot upvote (real situation you can find in edit history), but I have thought this topic through before asking, comming up with four points, the first being just obvious, second being the reason and last two being my struggle understanding what is happening (why is SE set up as it is). Finally boiling it up to suggestion, which was not so clear at first, so I had to edit the question after Vogel's answer, to make it clear, understanding it was not so - suggestion (feature request - marked as such from the beginning), not just asking about the state. This is, btw, the reason I did not accept his answer - not answering the full content/question - but the very fact also brings thoughts and questions about the very topic and possible answer to pt4, because I was tempted to accept the answer as generally accepted without trully accepted by me. That is interesting possibility, but I stay firm: that is not the correct use of accept - I would just get rid of it, not mark the correct answer (there is still none).

The answer

I would gladly accept Andrew's comment answer: It has been requested since 2009, and declined in 2012, because to me it reads: it may not be viable for every SE sub-domain and even if it was good for CR, it won't get implemented, because... ehm, read the comments below the question for yourself.

Disecting the points

  • pt1 - self-answer - obvious
  • pt2 - not enought reputation - I stay firm, they should be allowed to do so. Prohibiting users to upvote answers of their question only discouradges them to ever upvote - because they cannot do so now/immediately and won't notice and understand when they can, because they are currently denied the experience from the very beginning. The only reason for this (counter)measure I can think of is that some users could create alter-egos to upvote their own questions or answers to gain reputation. But finding those and deleting them will remove all upvotes making this strategy not usefull... unless the moderators or AI cannot cope with the sheer numbers (which could be the truth for SO, althought certainly not for CR and many other SE-subs).
  • pt3 - that is the plague, partially created by what I have described above in pt2 and Vogel612 prtially addresses in his answer too.
  • pt4 - and that is what I think many do and I myself was thinking about when considering to accept Vogel612's answer. NO, that is wrong. I can imagine that my own drive for the suggestion could be to get upvotes on my own answers and I cannot fully deny that, I am still a human, but my true drive was to make it even for everybody, to give everybody what they deserve. The question could still be about the numbers: 10+15; and about what to do when OP later accepts different answer (my solution: keep +10 upvote, remove 15 for accepted ... or maybe remove even less, because it could have been the correct answer at that time, but not today, because e.g. we got new C++ standard).

You must log in to answer this question.