4
$\begingroup$

Seems very low considering most users here have been on the website for a very long time and 500 isn't that much.

I mean, is it an arbitrary random number or is there a specific reason behind it?

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Now we're talking.. you are going to write a BIG answer somewhere.. Let me tell you Drien... a bounty bonus of 500 points is a lot already ! when I started here, it took me several weeks to get 500 points. People work hard here,to get all your questions answered before they get closed. So I agree, some bounties should be far more than 500 points. There are genius answers that deserve 5000. $\endgroup$
    – Goodies
    Jan 27 at 20:41
  • $\begingroup$ @Goodies 6%* of my questions are closed, 1 question closed out of 16 , 13 of which were counted as ''well received'' by the system $\endgroup$
    – Drien RPG
    Jan 27 at 21:06
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Goodies If a question is going to be closed, ideally it should receive no answers before closure. That's why we block new answers on closure. A bunch of answers on a closed question meant that the question wasn't closed soon enough. We have a policy that edits to a question doesn't invalidate existing answers, even if the question is closed. Each answer on a question makes it more difficult to make edits to resolve issues, after closure. $\endgroup$
    – sphennings
    Jan 27 at 21:14
  • $\begingroup$ @DrienRPG Keep in mind that upvotes are not reflective of site policy, just that people like the question. $\endgroup$
    – sphennings
    Jan 27 at 21:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @sphennings you refer to my remark about the fast closes. Imho the push-to-edit quickly does not work. First, I've no illusion that the majority of members under say 2000 points know how to prevent closure on WB. Second: your time limit does not work on internet. People dont "sit" on WB. Forum times are over. Internet is facebook/twitter like. People "fly by". When you close fast, they find their question closed.. and it takes reopen votes to revive it. These topics are abandoned. So if 5 people encounter a topic they want to close for 4 different reasons, it stays closed. It won't be edited. $\endgroup$
    – Goodies
    Jan 27 at 23:41
  • $\begingroup$ @sphennings this closing issue is a sideline here, I worked it out a bit, elsewhere.. worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/a/9639/86094 $\endgroup$
    – Goodies
    Jan 28 at 1:16

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

I guess I'd make a couple arguments for keeping it at 500 points:

  • The purpose of bounties is to attract attention to a question that needs answers or to reward an existing answer. If a 500-point bounty won't adequately attract attention . . . well, I'm not sure anything can.
  • 500 points is enough to spring a low-reputation member through a number of privilege levels - not terrible, but it can be jarring to suddenly have access to many tools and privileges when you haven't had time to practice with intermediate-level ones. Increasing the limit would only exacerbate the issue.
  • Increasing the limit would also make it easier to transfer lots of reputation points to sockpuppet accounts, and people do occasionally abuse the bounty system.
  • Finally, I'd argue that there simply isn't much demand for doing so. It's quite rare to see a 500-point bounty on a question on Worldbuilding (or, frankly, a bounty even half that size!).
$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Ultimately the answer is that Stack Exchange decided upon 500 when they built the bounty system.

You can read more about the policies and intent behind the bounties in the help center. Reading it we can that bounties are intended to draw attention to a post.

Sites have a daily rep cap of 200. With the exception of bounties you can only gain 200 rep from upvotes each day. Over two days worth of max reputation gain is high enough to draw attention to a post without greatly disrupting the existing reputation system.

$\endgroup$
0

You must log in to answer this question.

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