Is there a point where someone can conclude that they are being serially down-voted without being an outright paranoid?

Around 11am:
-2; 21 mins ago; downvote; When did Eru interfere in Arda directly? ; 
-2; 23 mins ago; downvote; How many Men were there on Arda at the time 
                           of War of the Ring? 
-2; 28 mins ago; downvote; Was there an “original sin” idea 
                           in the published version of Silmarillion?

Around 2pm:
-2; 20 mins ago; downvote; What happened to Saruman after he was knifed by Grima?
-2; 21 mins ago; downvote; What is the origin of the idea of God needing
                           a “voice” in “Dogma”? 

These are 5 out of 6 questions I posted in the last 24 hours. One can be counted as statistical noise (it has 3 other DVs), but the fact that this ALSO coincided with the day when I stood up for myself against what I see an unjustified VTC makes it suspicious.

This isn't the first time I get a bouts of 2-4 question downvotes with no comments in the span of 5-15 minutes. But I think 5 in a row is more of grounds to be suspicious of people than of statistics.

Here's another couple of samples from my old emails when I noticed it happening:

May 6, 2012
-2; 4 hours ago; downvote; Were any of the Avengers involved the last ...
-2; 4 hours ago; downvote; Is there any canon proof that Elder Wand 
                           actually works as reputed in a duel?
-2; 4 hours ago; downvote; Where did the “Memories transferred through DNA” 
                           idea used in Assassin's Creed come from?

May 12
-2 2 hours ago downvote What exactly was Radagast's role among Maiar? 
-2 2 hours ago downvote What does “Seven” and “nine” mean in “Seven of Nine”?

July 12
-2   1 hour ago; downvote; Is there any evidence regarding Aragorn having 
                           a beard in Tolkien?
-2   1 hour ago; downvote; What material is the snitch in Harry Potter made out of?
-2   1 hour ago; downvote; Did any Quidditch games ever end by 
                           agreement of the Captains?

Just to be clear, I'm merely asking for an opinion (or rather, facts to confirm that this is a "normal" pattern). I don't have any particular desire to ask SE to investigate it. Just want to know if other people experience this frequently (e.g. 3+ downvotes in an hour, or 4+ a day) on disparate questions - and never on answers - with any regularity (couple of times a month).

I also had a more fun pattern where someone was DVing 1-2 questions a day, every day, for many days. Always within one of two 1-hour periods during the day.


Anyone still think I'm a paranoid who only cares about rep?

Today's votes as of 1:30am EST (no intervening upvotes):
-2; 40 mins ago; downvote; Why were the Elves so great at archery?
-2; 37 mins ago; downvote; Were there any other Immortals aside from 
                           Connor and Duncan MacLeods who were relatives?
-2; 37 mins ago; downvote; Was T-X in some way responsible for Skynet's 
                           offensive actions on Judgement Day in T3?
-2; 38 mins ago; downvote; What was the first SciFi book or story 
                           co-written by 2 authors before 1957?
-2; 56 mins ago; downvote; How many R2 droid units were there according to canon?

Sep 10 2012. 
NONE of the questions are recent or have recent activity prior DV
-2; 20 mins ago; downvote; Why don't muggle-born wizards use Muggle 
                           technology to fight Death Eaters?
-2; 9 hours ago; downvote; What was the longest natural biological 
                           lifespan in Star Wars?
-2; 9 hours ago; downvote; Were there any “Starship Troopers” comics closer 
                           to the spirit of the book than the movie?
  • To provide context: @Tango asked in a tongue in cheek comment if there was a conspiracy against me. I checks the vote logs and saw the first batch of 3 today. So I figured I might as well ask if it's a common phenomemon or if Tango was more right than he was hoping for. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 19:27
  • Are you excluding the upvotes you received during those periods of time?
    – user1027
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 19:32
  • @Keen - "during those periods" generically, I guess so. I didn't find it relevant other than proof that most of the downvoted questions were not so generically bad that they deserved a bunch of DVs. But the votes listed here actually showed as solid blocks of red on my votes report most of the times - e.g. I don't think I needed to delete any interspersing green upvotes to the best of my recollection. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 19:36
  • @Keen - if it matters to the answer, I can probably double check via "/repuation" link Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 19:37
  • @Keen - today's first 3 were a block: 3 23138 (-2) 3 23105 (-2) 3 23106 (-2) 2 23107 (5) 2 23121 (5) 2 23107 (5) 3 23105 (-2) 2 23138 (5) 3 23122 (-2) 3 23107 (-2) Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 19:41
  • 1
    It does look moderately suspicious, but no one can do anything about it except devs or the script, and it's not really bad enough to trigger either.
    – Kevin
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:03
  • 3
    Keep in mind that voters have their SE time of day too. Are these votes on new content or old stuff? Was the same question involved more than once in these downvotes? Anyway <shrug> it's a negligible amount of rep and not a significant change on these questions' score.
    – user56
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:12
  • @Gilles - Today they were all on recent (last 24 h) contect, 3 of 5 were only DVs among tons of UVs, one was 2 DVs against many UVs and one was the controvercial Q with tons of UVs and DVs. However, the ones from prior dates, IIRC, were a mix of DVs on both old and new questions. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:27
  • @Gilles - also, as you can see from the subjects, I ONLY included DVs on distinct questions. All of them in VERY tight time spreads (most within 10 mins). I obviously don't think multiple DVs on the same Q can possibly be serial Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:28
  • @Gilles - As far as "negligible", you can't measure the psychological damage of being serially downvoted via rep. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:32
  • 3
    Half of your update's questions aren't random. They're some of your lowest-voted questions. If a low-rep user were to sort your questions by votes and go to the last page, I would bet those 3 would be sitting right there.
    – user1027
    Commented Sep 8, 2012 at 15:51
  • 2
    @Keen - Listen to yourself. You just described someone deliberately seeking questions from a specific user to downvote. And you don't see ANY problem with that? Or with the fact that you treated me like a whiny person only caring about no downvotes. Commented Sep 8, 2012 at 17:21
  • 1
    @DVK All I did was point out an actual pattern. You haven't bothered to do that. You also said I don't have any particular desire to ask SE to investigate it. so no I don't see any problem with this. If you wanted it investigated and fixed, then you wouldn't exclude the people who do that.
    – user1027
    Commented Sep 8, 2012 at 17:24
  • @Keen - good catch on today's pattern, though I think one of Qs was 57/9 so way out of pattern. When I said "random" i was thinking time of posting, since that was the pattern yesterday. Forgot that you can sort questions in non-chronological ways Commented Sep 8, 2012 at 17:26
  • 2
    @DVK Well, you won't get that, sorry.
    – user1027
    Commented Sep 8, 2012 at 17:31

3 Answers 3


I really don't see the problem. A single user could cause you to loose at most 546 rep this way (right now). That seems to be what you gain about every two to three days! Note that sock-puppets do not count: You need at least 125 rep to even cast down votes.

Reputation is a number. It doesn't even cost you anything to increment other people's rep count. And above 20k it doesn't even change anything you can do (correct me if I'm wrong). There's no way you will be reduced to this unless the number of serial downvoters times the number of your questions surpasses 15000.

Since you seem to take this really personally, I'll do my best to cheer you up; Here's a picture of a cute kitty:

enter image description here

  • 1
    you can't measure the psychological damage of being serially downvoted via rep. If all I cared about was rep, I clearly wouldn't have bothered posting this. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:33
  • 1
    Also, not to be rude, but I wasn't asking whether I should care. I was asking whether I'm seeing a valid pattern others can confirm, or imagining things. Sorry but I flagged your answer to be moved to comment since it doesn't address my question at all. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:35
  • 4
    @DVK: Your question was at which point bothering about serial downvotes was paranoia. You specifically asked about opinion. My answer tells you, if you bother to this extent it's exaggerated, bordering on paranoia (if you insist on calling it paranoia), yes. You don't have to apologise for flagging this post, but as I recently learned, this is not what mod flags are for.
    – bitmask
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:52
  • sorry if I was being unclear. I didn't ask at which point feeling bad about rep lost due to proven serial DV is paranoia. I was asking (or at least MEANT to ask) at which point looking at that specific pattern and assuming it is serial downvoting (as opposed to random statistical noise) is paranoia. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:54
  • 8
    @DVK: In that case, your question is not constructive. All we can do is speculate since you explicitly didn't want to involve the powers that be. Our bet is as good as yours and all that can be said is: Sure it could be serial but it could very well not be.
    – bitmask
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 20:57
  • I wanted to know if others saw such patterns frequently. So the question is constructive in that it can have a constructive answer: someone posting similar patterns that they frequently see. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:03
  • 5
    @DVK Filtering out all the upvotes you get, and listing a bunch of downvotes is not a pattern. You're just asking "does anyone get downvotes?" The answer is of course, "yes."
    – user1027
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:05
  • @bitmask - and the reason I don't want to involve powers that be is exactly what you posted - aside from extremely hurt feelings, no material harm has really been done. They didn't even manage to strongly fsck up my capping out statistics, though it was tried (via last hour downvotes) Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:06
  • @Keen - 3 downvotes on 3 unrelated questions in 10 minutes with no upvotes in between and no comments sounds like a pattern. Especially once it repeates several times (and a lot more often than several if you lower the bar to 2-in-a-row). Especially if there are no other scattered downvotes on random questions throughout the day. I agree it COULD be statistical noise. But I'd expect a lot more time dispersal if that was the case. Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:07
  • 3
    @DVK: I'm sorry to hear you take downvotes personally and allow them to get near to you. Regarding this aspect you have my compassion but there is nothing substantial anybody can do besides telling you "we're with ya bro". I suggest to simply take it as "some random jerk on the internet is trying to mess with this site's version of Jon Skeet" (which you are). Given your reputation a lot of people really really like your contribution. Why would you allow some gimp to trump that?!
    – bitmask
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:13
  • @bitmask - because it means someone doesn't like me personally. Which is why I asked - if all it is is universes big statistical "PTHTHTHTH" to me for not liking Statistics, I'm slightly puzzled but wouldn't care. As you yourself said (and i agree), downvotes in and out of themselves aren't very important (I like to know why they happen since once in a while, they lead to constructive suggestions for improvement of the Q - Pearson was usually pretty good as a random example I recall), but otherwise I wouldn't even pay too much attention to them). Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:16
  • 3
    @DVK: So if someone goes through your questions, because they decided to visit your profile, and find that you ask (and answer) a lot of great stuff and gives you, say 5 upvotes in a short time span, do you think someone secretly fell in love with you? No, you would probably think "huh, somebody likes harry potter" (or whatever). Do the same with downvotes.
    – bitmask
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:24
  • 1
    @bitmask - (1) the FIRST thing I think (from experience) is "&$#@! Someone will get their serial upvotes reversed by a script, and I will be the unlucky idiot holding the bag when the script strips my points from 200 to 140 right before the end of the day, losing me a daily rep cap statistics" :) This happened to both Slytherincess, me and AFAIR, Tango before, from chat recollections Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:28
  • 5
    @DVK: Your toast does always land on the side with the butter, doesn't it? Perhaps my edit cheers you up :)
    – bitmask
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:33
  • 9
    A++ kitty, would "eeeeeeeeeee!" again.
    – user366
    Commented Sep 7, 2012 at 21:34

To answer your direct question, you should be concerned with voting discrepencies when you see several posts on the same day voted within seconds of each other—indicating someone is going down the list of your posts in your profile and down-voting—or when you see multiple "serial down/upvoting reversed notices" on your reputation graph (like the serial upvoting reversal you had on April 4th).

The voting activity over the last couple of days on your profile is curious, and is outside the norms of the voting activity on your profile (see below). While it doesn't have the hallmarks of serial-downvoting (several down-votes within seconds of each other), it may be worth looking into.

If you ever have a concern that something is going on, asking SE—either by emailing them or through the moderators—is the best way to get it handled, as they have far better tools than are publicly available, and have seen real serial-voting occur enough times to know when it's a real problem or when it's just the result of confirmation bias.

To that point, Izkata's queries are inaccurate, the analysis is flawed, and there's very little evidence of the conclusion reached (that you have a stalker).

To demonstrate the flaws with Izkata's queries, rather than construct a query ex nihilo, I looked at your actual reputation changes as publicly available on your user profile. Looking at January, you had 30 downvotes, 3 of which were reversed, on 15 posts and 13 days:

Assuming the hypothetical stalker exists and was party to down-votes on every one of those posts, only two days (1/19 and 1/20) had multiple posts down-voted: that's not serial down-voting.

And, of the 15 posts highlighted here, 8 received multiple downvotes, indicating that multiple people thought there was a problem with the post. This leaves 7 posts on the following days:

  • 2012-01-07 - 1 post
  • 2012-01-13 - 1
  • 2012-01-19 - 1
  • 2012-01-20 - 2
  • 2012-01-27 - 1
  • 2012-01-30 - 1

The differences between the days when you received solitary down-votes are 6 days, 6 days, 1 day, 7 days, 3 days. But let's look at your posts on those days. These are the posts you created the day you got down-voted, indicating someone saw it as it was posted or on the front page (i.e., they didn't need to go digging for things of yours to down-vote):

These are the posts that were either voted on the day after you created the post, or were bumped by other activity on the question:

Given that all of your posts in January can be explained by normal voting activity: what's more likely: a "stalker" was meticuously and diabolically down-voting in such a way as to be virtually undetectable, or that the down-votes you received are the result of your posting activity (high post volume combined with multiple controversial posts)?

But maybe that's just January. According to Izkata's post, that's when this all started: maybe the stalker was just learning the ropes. Let's look at August, the last full month, and one that Izkata's post doesn't touch. You had 23 downvotes (no reversals) on 19 posts and 15 days:

5 days had multiple posts downvoted (8/1, 8/22, 8/23, 8/24, and 8/27). Of the 19 posts, 5 received multiple downvotes. This leaves 14 on the following days:

  • 2012-08-01 - 2
  • 2012-08-05 - 1
  • 2012-08-07 - 1
  • 2012-08-09 - 1
  • 2012-08-10 - 1
  • 2012-08-16 - 1
  • 2012-08-22 - 1
  • 2012-08-23 - 1
  • 2012-08-24 - 3
  • 2012-08-27 - 1
  • 2012-08-29 - 1

Of those posts, these are the posts you created the day you got down-voted:

These are the posts that were either voted on the day after you created the post, or were bumped by other activity on the question:

These are the posts from your back catalog that were down-voted "out of the blue":

Comparing January to August:

  • Total down-votes went down by 17% (27 to 23)
  • Total posts down-voted went up by 26% (15 to 19)
  • Total days with down-votes went up 15% (13 to 15)
  • Total posts with solitary down-votes doubled (7 to 14)
  • Total posts with solitary down-votes down-voted "out of the blue" went from 0 to 2.

At the same time:

  • Total posts you created went down by 43% (136 to 77)
  • Total days you posted went down by 7% (30 to 28)

That's interesting: down-votes went up but your posting activity went down. Does this mean there really is a stalker? Perhaps, but again, the evidence doesn't entail that conclusion. All but two posts can be accounted for by normal voting activity: you posted, and either the post received multiple down-votes or someone saw that post as it came up and decided then and there that the post wasn't useful.

But what about the two posts voted on out of the blue? It could've been a stalker, or it could've been something far more benign:

  • The posts showed up in a related sidebar
  • Someone was searching for information about the topic and found your posts
  • The post was linked somewhere that a person with SciFi.SE rep frequents

And what of the increased "normal" down-voting on your posts during this time period? It could be explained by a stalker now following your posts as you make them and down-voting them, but you were only down-voted on 15 of the 28 days you posted. Was the stalker just lazy? Even more diabolical than previously thought?

Now let's take a look at something a stalker/serial-downvoter has no control over: the number of up-votes you received.

  • In January, you had 958 upvotes, or ~97% of your total votes for the month.
  • In August, you had 606 upvotes, or ~96% of your total votes for the month.

The percentages look pretty much even, proportional to the number of down-votes you received, but the number of upvotes you received during the two months actually dropped by 37%, which is substantially higher than the 23% drop in down-votes. The community in general was just more lukewarm to your posts, particulary to your back catalog, in August than they were in January. While a conspiracy orchestrated by the hypothetical stalker is possible, I offer a few alternative suggestions:

  • The community's sensibilities are changing
  • The quality of your posts have been changing
  • You have a larger back catalog than you did 8 months ago, which gives more chances for people to find something to fault when viewing past posts across the site
  • Random fluctuations within the margin of error

To conclude, while there's no definitive proof that a stalker doesn't exist, I do think you're being a little paranoid. There is evidence, proportionally speaking, that your posts are doing worse than they did several months ago, but there's very little evidence one person, or even a few people, are the ones causing it, and the decrease in overall performance of your posts is more due to less up-voting than more down-voting.

You have literally hundreds upon hundreds of posts, and nobody can bat a thousand. Try not to sweat the small stuff. Look at kitties instead:

Kitty cat

  • 2
    OK, now i'm being stalked by kittens!!! Seriously, this is some heavy duty analysis - I will dig through it and see if I agree. But at first glance, you did NOT explain in any of your analysis two things: (1) the data series that ACTUALLY caused me to get paranoid (Sep 7 and 8); and (2) The fact that some of the other series were also very time-correllated. BTW, if you did explain it, sorry, I'll delete the comment upon careful re-read of the post. Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:33
  • 1
    +1 for the much more in-depth analysis, it looks like my queries at least managed to make others think about it more XP
    – Izkata
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:34
  • In other words, if you are right, your post may be an interesting rebuttal to Izkata's conclusion and data, but does not address the ones in original question. I fully agree that average voting patterns are curious but may have multiple causes (e.g. my posting more crap than before, to put your suggestion in less delicate terms) Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:34
  • @Izkata Oops: sorry about the name mix-up!
    – user366
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:34
  • @DVK Clearly you've never owned kittens. They always stalk you. :) Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:36
  • @GabeWillard - I had a misfortune of being adoped for a month by a cat that wasn't ours (and was not raised in a human home, to boot - it was a foundling by its permanent owner and not housebroken). The memories are LESS than fond :) The preferred method of staking was waking up everyone in the house all night, and doing its business under every piece of furniture Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:38
  • @DVK The first two paragraphs are to your immediate concerns. Your post (and Izkata's) used historical data (the voting activity on your profile over several months) to support the premise that there is a stalker: the bulk of my post is intended to refute that. If the activity over the past two days is indeed the work of a serial down-voter, there's very little (if any) evidence to suggest that it's connected to what's happened over the past few months, and you are better served by asking SE to look into it.
    – user366
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:45
  • @MarkTrapp - I would like to go over June and July data with the same methodology sine this is when questonable issues occured as per my OP. But so far your methodology looks pretty solid, and does seem to support that there is a plausible explanation for Izkata's data fror those 2 months. Then again, I didn't have any serial downvotes I found to complain about during them, so it is actually not an unexpected (but quite comforting) conclusion. As I said to Keen, I don't get upset about downvotes when I post crap. I care about downvotes if someone targets me personally. Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:50
  • @MarkTrapp Nooo problem. If tab-completion isn't available, it's usually messed up in some way (most often with 'z' -> 's', which I suspect is done mostly by UK-ers)
    – Izkata
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 19:01
  • 2
    Wow, that's an amazing analysis. It's almost as if you tried to figure out how to stalk someone and not be detected... :) Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 9:04
  • @Ward You know too much. The men in the black helicopters will be with you shortly.
    – user366
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 12:01
  • @Ward - no, Mark is likely an AI driving the serial downvote cansellation script. Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 13:37

I am of the opinion that DVK may well have a stalker of some sort. After plugging in several users to a query I came up with earlier tonight, the pattern of DVK's downvotes do indeed look very weird, especially when compared to some of the other top users.

  • DVK - In January, it suddenly spikes really high and stays that way.
  • Slytherincess - Unusually high number of downvotes in May and June, but not prior.
  • TangoOversway - A spike in Jan, Feb (extra high), and Mar, but it drops back to normal after that.
  • Pureferret - A large number of downvotes every other month (Feb, Apr, Jun).
  • Major Stackings - A small spike in June.
  • Sachin Shekhar - Spiked in March and has since stayed high.

Of the entire first page of users (that's 36 accounts) with the highest rep, no one else has gotten 10 or more downvotes in a single month. Examples of more normal numbers of downvotes (still from the first page) would be Jeff, Keen, Xantec, or myself.

Data up through June is currently all that's available. The queries will update when data becomes available, but this answer may not be updated when that happens.

EDIT: I should point out that the query being used in this post is attempting to single out posts so that a stalker can be more easily identified - many downvotes on one post on the same date would count as 1, not the number of downvotes, since each user can only downvote a post once. Using this query for total downvotes shows basically the same patterns.

  • 1
    To be fair, as far as merely total # of downvotes, you need to normalize for # of posts, so I may not be as far an outstanding as mere absolute DV #s suggest, just because I post tons. Tremendous analysis - wish I could upvote 10 times on technical achievement alone, never mind that it makes me look less of a nutcase :) Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 4:42
  • @DVK I considered that, but it wouldn't really explain the sudden spike from Dec 2011 - Jan 2012, nor why it stayed steady in the range of 17-23 downvotes for 5 months (unless you stopped or extremely slowed down how much you posted in that time).
    – Izkata
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 4:57
  • @DVK The query/subquery could use some tweaking (with the DISTINCT being on the pair of vote date and post the vote was on, which I'm not sure is right), though this does seem revealing for an initial go
    – Izkata
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 5:00
  • Actually, apparently I posted 3x posts in January 2012 compared to December. But the posts dropped off to normal in Apirl and on, whereas downvote count did not. data.stackexchange.com/science%20fiction%20and%20fantasy/query/… Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 6:00
  • ,,, and the downvote spike was more than 3x Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 6:13
  • 1
    One thing to consider with all of these numbers, are there any other reasons for the downvotes to be occurring, besides simple spite? If someone gets in a rut of poor posts, that would be equally reflected by these queries, no? It's the old correlation/causation problem. I'd be interested in seeing analysis of the posts themselves, although that presents a massive research project. Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:15
  • @GabeWillard Funny you should say that, because I thought the exact same thing.
    – user366
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:16
  • @GabeWillard That's what I suspect with Tango and Pureferret (and probably the others), but it's just really odd that DVK's downvotes never normalized.
    – Izkata
    Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:25
  • @GabeWillard - I'm more than willing to admit that Izkata's statistical data can be explained by crap quality of my posts (though, as noted, many of the recent downvotes were on old and solidly-upvoted-before posts, but that's not a proof). What I am puzzled by is the literally serial ones, where 3+ downvotes (or 5 as the last 2 days) happen on different posts, ALL within minutes of each other. It could be statistical fluctuation that these exact 10-20 mins are when 5 people independently decided that 5 posts suck. But sounds like a low probability event to me. Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:41
  • 1
    @DVK Devil's advocate: I see five questions on the front page that look interesting, and open each in a tab. After reading them all, I go through and vote accordingly. Is that serial voting? Everyone uses the site differently, and it's possible that votes close together do have a reason. Serial voting to me describes voting being done for no other purpose than how you feel about the poster, not necessarily the timing involved. Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:44
  • @GabeWillard - not implausible... but I must admit I don't find it terribly likely. Unless I somehow happen to be the worst poster in SFF's history, such a pattern would then occur for other high volume posters who have comparable magnitude of total down-votes (15-25 a month) in some months. Nobody piped up and announced such a pattern yet. Commented Sep 9, 2012 at 18:54
  • 2
    @GabeWillard I'm pretty sure the afflicted posts were not all on the front page. You'd need to look for them in DVK's profile.
    – AncientSwordRage Mod
    Commented Sep 10, 2012 at 18:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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