In the above screenshot you can see I've already crossed the quest. But it is still not awarding it to me and remaining in the available list.  Can anyone say what is the reason of this and what to solve this issue.  Update 1:  As of seeing answer of the duplicate linked question what I understand is I've to maintain a positive question record, not only good question.  The  has two criteria to be awarded:   Ask a good question on 5 separate days Maintain a positive question record      My Suggestion is to make them separate or split that count with negative mark beside it. As it is looking odd on seeing 6/5 completed   and still pending. Just asking to make it more user friendly look.
3935
As you can see in the picture, I have 13 out of 5. But it's been like this for about two months! What's the reason for that?
82531
My reputation listing is showing that on Mar 4 and 5, some of my answers got unaccepted, but when I go to those answers, they are still showing as accepted -- they still have the green check mark. Can somebody please explain what is happening with my profile?     Here are three of the answers that are listed above:
36601
I got  question in review. First sentence is:     I know there is a  question, but no answers.   And indeed the two questions are virtually identical. I started to flag as duplicate - but the original question had no answer at the time, so it wouldn't be correct and apparently . (I didn't go so far as to try to submit the flag).  What is the proper action here? How do we want such a question to be handled? Should both (or more) questions stay open indefinitely until either is answered and somebody gets the good idea to do the duplicate linking?   As the new question is essentially a bump to the front page (perhaps with re-tagging), especially in the case where the OP knows that a previous question exist, perhaps something should be done to enable bumping re-emphasizing without writing the new question.  As I wrote this,  actually got an answer. So the old one should now be closed as a duplicate of the new - but my question remains for the case where all known/found duplicate questions have no answer?  Ironically, just before asking this, the "Questions that may already have your answer" gave me ... (Although the suggestion has no answer). So it has been asked before - the comment there even suggest the ability to re-emphasize.
3726
There have been discussion earlier if similar but different questions should all go into one question post or into several independent (which may link to each other). The general consensus is to ask several separate questions:      I fully agree on that. However, when I do it, often enough I get votes as exact duplicate.  One example:    closed as exact duplicate of    It is obviously not an exact duplicate because it asks about try_lock which does something different than lock. It still may be that the answers may be the same, however, I am not sure about that (and the people who closed it also don't, regarding to their comments).  I am wondering how I should handle it in the future. Because of such problems, I start to put several questions again into one question. But then I often don't really know what I should choose as the answer if they only answer one of the questions.  When I had them separated and the second and the second one gets closed, I am also not exactly sure what I should do if the first question was already answered but the answer does not answer my second question (see my example above -- the answer about lock does not mention try_lock at all).
46015
I've been seeing this for a while now, especially on the  tag.  A user will ask a question (usually very simple, and mostly a duplicate of older questions. But that's for another day).  The user will get one or more answers that successfully answer the question. A little bit later, usually around 5-10 minutes but can be more, another user or users will come along (mostly low rep users) and post the exact same solution, sometimes changing the wording a bit, but sometimes being lifted word for word from the other answer(s).  This is slightly different from the Fastest gun in the west problem. I have nothing against answers posted in very quick succession that solve the problem. The ones I'm talking about are answers posted long after the first correct solution, that say the same thing.  A good example of this is available . All three answers say the same thing. One offers code + explanation (first answer), the second one (three minutes later) offers only code and the third one (a full eighteen minutes later) offers only a text answer.  How should answers like this be dealt with? They are adding nothing of value to the community, as the problem has already been answered. The person posting the answer could not have run into the "The other and I posted the answer so close to each other we didn't know about duplicates until after posting" problem, as there is an eighteen minute gap.   is another example.
76249
Since  is not really intended behaviour apparently, I propose a period of 24 hours after the bounty has expired during which the question will not be on the featured tab but the promoter can still manually award the bounty. The "cost" of this would be that no new bounty could be set up until the old one were awarded.  Similar to , which got closed as a duplicate without duplicate link... (Well, according to Robert's comment there, it's , to which he replied with basically what I am proposing here, but an answer is not a feature-request...)
70578
I had  in the close review queue. It clearly shows the question with a bounty, but bountied questions cannot be closed. Either bounty questions shouldn't be used as audits, or don't display the bounty notice.    This is the same problem , except it's happening in the close queue rather than reopen.
75086
Yesterday, I voted to close a question as a duplicate. Today, I'm curious if the question is still open, but I did not keep a link to that question.  Is there some way to see a list or history of questions that I voted to close? On my activity tab, I can only find "reviews", which does not include questions that I vote on outside of reviews.
61387
I'm trying to  when I run into this:     "You have already deleted 5 of your own posts today; further deletes are blocked"      I found conflicting information on this very annoying limit:   This post from May 25, 2010: . This is marked . If this is no longer the case, please edit that question and flag it as . Then , indicates that the problem has risen from the dead -- despite :     Each time that I've seen it (pruning subpar answers), it's been a user who is deleting their own redundant zero-upvote answers. Can you tweak the algorithm slightly so answers with less than one upvote don't count towards tripping this flag?     (Emphasis added.) :     I don't mind it when         cleaning up redundant answers on questions that have multiple alternate good answers   cleaning up old, "less awesome" answers that are no longer reflective of the user's current skill level         (Emphasis added.)     So why do we have barriers in place, to making SO answers less, "less awesome"?      Proposed Solution:  Please let us (¿once again?) delete an unlimited number of our own answers, when they have zero up-votes and are not marked as the answer.  Otherwise, please edit the linked questions to clear up the confusion.
29012
I just asked my first question on stackoverflow and I'm really impressed that my question seems to be answered sufficiently already! See:    The issue I have is that the last two answers combined would provide the most complete answer. What's the proper way to go about combining them, marking the question answered, and giving credit where credit is due?  Thanks big time guys for saving us all from experts exchange hell!  Edit: Wow, 5 responses in 5 minutes. I think what makes the most sense is that I create my own answer out of the two. I don't think the second part of my question was answered though.  What is the proper way to give credit to the 2 answers that I'm combining? Is an upvote for each sufficient?
23185
How should SO handle users who don't "maintain" their questions by selecting answers, or remarking newer/better answers as the chosen one?  Many questions...   Have no answer marked correct, even when one is plainly there Are not reviewed by the poster to select a new correct answer   I don't mind taking the time to answer questions, but don't see the point when I don't get "reputation" for doing so since no one reads those questions, and reputation seems to be the point of the site.  I think the "remind to accept an answer" feature is there now, since I just saw it when coming back.  I missed it the first time though.
113487
Existing, already-answered question:   My own unanswered and closed question:   The answers to the existing question don't answer in any way the question I am interested in.  Now, I was told  that I just should start a bounty on the already answered question.  I just did that, and the bounty ended without helping me at all. The default when I don't specify any answer &#8212; giving it to the answer with the highest score &#8212; does not make sense. That answer does not help me at all. None of the answers do help me.  Now I wonder what I should do. I am still waiting for an answer to my question. My question still is closed. To get traction on it, I would have to start another bounty. I am very short with reputation on Super User, so I can't just always do that again and again.  To not lose the reputation senselessly for the first bounty, I thought I would make a dummy answer and give that dummy answer the reputation. That way, I could keep my question open with further bounties until really got answered. That didn't work for some reason. It seems I just lost the reputation. Was that a bug/problem or is this intended?  How should I handle this? Obviously I cannot just always open bounties again and again until I get an answer. So should I just ignore it and go on to another question/answer site where unanswered questions can stay open?  Or maybe the system should be fixed so I can get the reputation back from bounties that didn't get me an answer I wanted.
30345
I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked flag again and found this:    Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:    Note: There are several similar questions:       The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised.
83565
At  I was able to award the bounty 25 minutes after it expired. Unfortunately I forgot to screenshot this, there was a message like "This question had a bounty ... that has expired 25 min ago", but the award bounty icon was clickable and so I did successfully. Is this a bug or the answer to the "I missed awarding my bounty in time" problem? The question did not show up under featured questions, so being able to award the bounty within some grace period actually seems sensible.  edit since bounties are now :
10498
The  is currently showing [closed], [duplicated] and [on hold] questions at the need answer tab. My suggestion is to hide them since they can't be answered.   Sorting by "votes" at SO, we see tons of [duplicated] questions filling almost the entire first page. This way is harder to find good questions (= high upvoted) to answer.
16408
Note: I don't seem to have actually been awarded the badge.    I just got this message:    however, I'm still quite a bit away from the reputation requirement:    I didn't get a notification that I earned the badge, nor is it in my badge list. But I cannot select it for tracking anymore:    Not sure if this is related to     I did not get the badge awarded, but maybe it's just not that time of the day yet (does the tracking earning notice and the actual awarding occur on different schedules)?
91315
Poking around the people's profiles to see how the  I keep seeing things like this:  It looks strange to have a 25/5 progress on a badge, but the dialog explains that what this user is missing is a positive record of asking. The  is: (total questions - negative questions - closed - deleted)/total questions &gt;= 0.5  If you look at , it's hard to see how his asking record could be anything but exceptional. According to  his asking record is 0.875. The problem is that he asked many of his questions in the early days of the site that were well-received, but later deleted. Some were deleted after the question was . My suggestion is that we change the asking record formula: (total questions - negative questions - closed - early deleted)/total questions &gt;= 0.5  The early deleted variable counts only questions deleted within 60 days of being asked. I picked 60 days because it's the dividing line between being able to . After looking through the list of people who would get the Curious badge on Stack Overflow with this change, I noticed a few things:  Many of them have self-deleted questions on their record. Often these are questions that were asked and basically ignored. After a few months, the original asker went back and deleted their question. It's hard to know what happened in each individual case, but my guess is that they never found a solution to their specific question and worked around the issue instead. (I have a few of those, but I'm not courteous enough to delete them.)  These users don't tend to ask the same question over and over again. I ran a similar test that excluded self-deleted questions. That group included a lot of cases of people asking a question, not getting an answer after a day or two, deleting the question, and asking the same question again. This strategy doesn't work if you wait two months to delete your first question.  Two mods (George Stocker and Gordon), Tim Post, and myself are on the list of users who would get a Curious badge under this system. On Meta Stack Exchange 5 current employees would be newly eligible for the badge. In my (admittedly biased) opinion, these are curious users.  I did some spot check on the lower end of the reputation scale. Every user I looked at fit my model of the ideal recipient of the Curious badge; they asked mostly upvoted questions with few closed questions. This change would add about 3286 new Curious badges on Stack Overflow, so there will certainly be a few exceptions I didn't find. But I think they are more than balanced by the clearly deserving users who will be awarded new badges.    Proposal: For the Curious, Inquisitive, and Socratic badges, don't count questions deleted 60 or more days after asking as deleted for the purposes of calculating asking record. These questions may still count as negatively scored or closed, if applicable. Days that include deleted questions, no matter when they are deleted, do not count toward the days asked criteria.   Modified Proposal: For the Curious, Inquisitive, and Socratic badges, don't count questions deleted or closed 60 or more days after asking as deleted or closed for the purposes of calculating asking record. These questions may still count as negatively scored, if applicable. Days that include deleted or closed questions, no matter when they are deleted or closed, do not count toward the days asked criteria. On Stack Overflow, that would add about 665 Curious badges, including two more for moderators (casperOne and 0x7fffffff) and one for an employee (Oded). On the opposite end of the reputation scale my spot checks are a bit muddier. Instead of a small number of deleted (and usually closed) questions, this list turns up users whose latest questions still aren't all that interesting. Even so, on balance a few extraneous bronze badges seem worthwhile in exchange for acknowledging truly curious users.