This is getting me confused. On my last four posts, the first vote I got on them was down, and that happened in less then 3 minutes from the time I posted them. The posts are the following (chronologically ordered):

  1. Question, 2 net (now only 1) votes: How big an object should I build on Earth so that it is visible from space?
  2. Answer, -1 net votes (2 downvotes, flagged as not an answer, but not deleted): Can a planet have a figure-8 type of orbit around two separate stars?
  3. Answer, 2 net votes: How to protect shops in the medieval era against thievery?
  4. Answer, 15 net votes (this got 2 downvotes): How would one build a refrigerator to survive a nuke?

On all these posts, the 1st vote was always a downvote. It most probably not because of other user's getting their answers higher - the one post is a question, and the downvotes were cast right after I posted the post. I don't think one user is behind this, but I'm just confused, why somebody would downvote.

Can I get some reason - some criticism, why could a person or more people give me a downvote, why they thought my posts are bad/not usefull?

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure, and as downvotes are anonymous we don't know who downvoted, and if they're the same person. I see no overarching trend (maybe a bit too short/lack of details? Maybe) to comment on, though. They collectively look fine. $\endgroup$
    – Ranger
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 17:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @NexTerren Thanks, but I'm still confused, and would like some criticism on (all) my posts. $\endgroup$
    – user22613
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 18:05
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ 1. A user openly asked if your question was on topic, so that user likely downvoted and others who agreed did too. 2. This isn't an answer, it's a rephrasing/demonstration of the question being asked. 3. I see nothing wrong with this reply. 4. I would guess replying "in character", so to speak, may have annoyed some users. The 15 up votes should've assuaged any doubts you had, though. $\endgroup$
    – rek
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 18:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'd like to highlight a point @rek touched on; focus on the net, not the one or two downvotes. If I said "punching puppies is wrong" there's going to somebody who disagrees with me. The net shows community approval or disapproval of you holding to the community standards. $\endgroup$
    – Ranger
    Commented Sep 16, 2016 at 18:23
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @rek, that's actually an answer, not a comment. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2016 at 11:49

2 Answers 2


1) We've got an ongoing argument about whether this sort of thing is on topic or not. You're talking about building a world, but it's a real world question and answer. While it feels like the sort of thing you can just google and get an answer, it turns out that it isn't.

2) You've generated some pretty gifs, but the question is science based and there's no scientific reasoning to your answer.

3) This one was always going to go to the person best able to explain how commerce worked in period rather than an answer based on the modern world, Erin's answer was pretty much perfect and was always going to swamp anything else.

4) You've got a really good creative answer there, the only reason I can see for the downvotes is that it would never actually work in practice as is explained by the accepted answer. (You've also been a little shallow on the science side, but that's not always a bad thing in a "that's not possible" situation.)


Not from standpoint of WB view, are they or aren't they belong to WB

Visibility of objects in space, and earth objects where discussed earlier, main factor is visible angle of that thing, second obvious albedo - for me I would not downvote, valid question.

with 8 orbit answer - 3 body problem have some known analytical solutions and 8 orbit one of them if I remember correctly, also http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/03/physicists-discover-whopping-13-new-solutions-three-body-problem - that are first thoughts, although it takes time to confirm if the thought's are true or not. Did short research and can't confirm them. But it would be better to start not from probability of existence, but by stating is it or is it not op's like analytical solution. Your animation is incorrect, and illustrates impossible movements, red arrow. Not all green arrows are good, it just not so obvious, red is where oblivious problems are. Arrow are kinda velocity vectors.

enter image description here

Transition from inertial system to not inertial system done incorrect, and answer composition provokes to believe it is done correct, intended or not.

Shop answer looks valid, it is done, someones problem could be while still displaying them as op demands. although I have not read others answers, there might be some other reasons.

With nuclear fridge - funny answer, no place to complain, 240 free points), haters gona hate.
Although this thing might protect from wife, or may be from police(place to hide) but it adds nothing to nuclear blast protection, but it is rather OP's fault, then your answer.

  • melting point for oxygen is 54K, boiling boiling is 90K - not 30K as u mention
  • it is technically hard to keep it that way
  • it will not last for long any way so Na2O2 or such are good enough for same goal
  • pedals to generate electricity - omg, lol)) - where emergency food ejecting mechanisms !!

But overall I would like to see such thing in some comedy movie )

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for taking the effort to answer my question. +1 $\endgroup$
    – user22613
    Commented Sep 24, 2016 at 8:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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