Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Why can users get negative reputation?

Parent

Why can users get negative reputation?

+8
−0

I saw a user account which had a negative reputation. On the StackExchange sites, the minimum user rep is 1.

So why is a negative reputation possible here? I'd like to know the reason, if it was a conscious design decision.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (3 comments)
Post
+2
−1

My guess:

Because they used a signed integer type for rep, therefore it's not capped at 0.

(And hypothesizing that because of lazyness and simplicity rep substraction performs just a substraction instead of a capped substraction).

rep := rep + -penalty;

vs:

rep := (rep + -penalty > 1) ? rep + -penalty : 1;

Here using a simple substraction has the advantage of easier detection of arithmetic overflow. But I doubt it's using raw/machine numeric types. Because it's Ruby - I guess it auto promotes to arbitrary precision. But it was supposed to be C#. There are raw/machine numeric types in C#.


your comments

I don't think the Q was about technical details.

I agree. However, in the particular case of Codidact1, many current - interim? - design decisions are tightly intimate with the corresponding technical implication, because they actually predate Codidact2 itself, in some cases by many years. I could guess therefore, some of those might been taken probably with simplicity in mind.

1: This Codidact occurrence, you can read as Qpixel.
2: Codidact in the broad sense. Post-"Dear Stack Exchange, Inc.,".

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (1 comment)
General comments
FoggyFinder‭ wrote about 4 years ago

I don't think the Q was about technical details.