I had around 1700+ reputation points on Stack Overflow, but when I logged in today, it was 16. There hasn't been any notification or any email from Stack&nbsp;Overflow. Further, Stack&nbsp;Overflow is not displaying my name but some userXXXXXX. Why did this happen? I did not do anything wrong.  I am sure this was not because of serial upvoting. And why has the profile name changed?
45359
This user is only displaying 56 rep.   But surely (s)he has much more than that.        The user has also never given out any bounties.  Also, badges are missing:
122712
I and my friend used to ask programming questions on Stack Overflow, until we saw that 90% of our questions have at least 1 downvote and nobody cares to explain or at least give a clue why.  For example:        And many more on Super User... (can't see up/down count there)   It seems to me like you're allowing this kind if mingebag-ish behavior on purpose. Is it fun to click on a good question's vote count and see like +5/-3? Does it seem right to you?   It definitely doesn't seem right to me or my friend, who quit this website because of this.  Don't you think this must be stopped, possibly now?  You know, my problem here is that, when a question gets a downvote first (has overall negative reputation), it ceases to get views and thus less chances to get an answer. I came to stack overflow to get answers on my questions, not to have their quality or reason questioned.
110855
The "Reputation &amp; Moderation" page on any site (/help/site-moderators) still refers to the company behind Stack Exchange as Stack Exchange and not Stack Overflow.     Moderators act as a liaison between the community and Stack Exchange the company.   Seeing as how the name change was recent, I'm not surprised this hasn't been caught yet, and I'm sure there are other instances of this around somewhere.
120373
Yesterday I got 200+ reputation on , the reputation is added in the combined flair in the web browsers, but the same is not updated in the Stack Exchange Android app. In the  it is mentioned as  please note that only sites where you have more than 200 reputation will appear, and that flair is only updated once every 24-36 hours.  If it is updated for web browsers and not for the Stack Exchange Android app, is it a bug or is there any extra time limit for the Stack Exchange Android app? Adding the screenshots for reference: In the web browser:    In the Stack Exchange Android app:    Stack Exchange Android App Version: 1.0.77
26942
I just posted a comment beginning with @username, and my @username part of the comment disappeared (it was the first word in the comment).  Is there a lolcat inside the Stack Exchange database nomming on notifications? May I suggest you feed it?    P.S. I'm guessing this is a brand spanking new feature, but I can see this coming up a lot
102591
Yesterday I had 3,606 reputation but today I have 3,592.  My profile shows that I lost 6 reputation when a user was removed, but that would put me on 3,600 - 8 reputation has magically disappeared.  Adding up all of my reputation does work out at 3,591 (I'm assuming by default new users have 1 rep, so that would make sense).  Somewhere a reputation change since yesterday isn't being displayed. I don't know what this would be for, but -8 would lead me to believe that someone removed their up-vote on an answer I'd posted which already had a down-vote (could it be from that deleted user?).  I don't know if this is a bug or if there is simply a delay between reputation updating, but I figured it was worth reporting.    Sadly I cannot prove that I had 3,606 reputation yesterday.
29299
Over at Science Fiction &amp; Fantasy, I answered this question:  (spoilers for Harry Potter 6/7!). This brought my reputation up to 10,565. However... this upvote didn't show up in the dropdown. Some screenshots:  The dropdown, showing +120 today:    My ?tab=reputation page, showing +130:    My /reputation page, showing the upvote:    So...  Why is it not showing in the dropdown?    This also happened with  - the dropdown is exactly the same as before, and yet I gained another 10 rep, and it's showing in all the other places. And on this question - there's no change in the dropdown. And again on SO - I had a  approved, which gave me +2, and... nothing in the dropdown.
107442
I have created my StackOverflow Careers panel, and when I click 'add a stack overflow account with over 200 reputation' the site decides that I have no StackOverflow account at all, although my current one has over 300. I log in to both with the same StackExchange Account with the same email etc so I'm curious as to why this is happening.
39905
When I look at my reputation on stackoverflow I see one number, but when I look at my profile in the careers.stackoverflow I see another number.  Is it just slow to update (maybe it's a few days behind...)?  UPDATE:  Looks like this problem has been solved.  As of 5-28-14 my reputation levels in stackoverflow and careers.stackoverflow are now consistent.  Thanks to those doing the fixing!
74744
What happened with the menu that comes if I hover over my username in the top-bar? It was one of the most used feature on Stackoverflow since I've used it regularly to get a quick overview over my recent activities or reputation changes.  Is it possible to get it back somehow?
71325
I have noticed that by signing on to Stack&nbsp;Overflow, I am also signed on to my email account. But when I log out, it only logs me out of the site without logging me out of my email. This means I am running around saying "hey, you should XSS me". Is this specific to the way OpenID behaves, or is it specific to the way Stack&nbsp;Overflow implemented it?
11011
Coming from Stack Overflow here.  I understand that a point system is a must when you have experienced and inexperienced users all mixed together in the same boat. However, I don't understand the point of being able to see each other reputation. In fact, on Stack Overflow, the only thing that users gain with reputation are privileges, which is okay. However, these privileges are only meta tools that has nothing to do with their actual knowledge (to some extent). That being said, if these personal privileges were private (unknown to other users), it would change absolutely nothing for the other users, and the user itself.  Now, some of you will say that being able to see a user's reputation is a good overall measure of its actual capacity to answer. So when you see two answers which seem valid, but one from a 200 reputation user and one from a 20000 reputation user, our subconscious makes the biased assumption that the latter must be the best one. Even if it's usually the case, there is already a point system that takes care of that. In fact, if the latter is really a better answer, we vote the question up. If one's bad, we vote it down. As simple as that; no need for reputation.  Also, like stated in this , this makes users worry about reputation, just like if it was a form of RPG where some are better than others. However, the reality is that old users benefit from that, and new users will never be able to come as close in terms of reputation. It's not like boxing where you can prove you can knock your opponent. It's a system where only time can push you up, even if you are extremely knowledgeable but unfortunately new to the platform. Most importantly, I think that a platform like Stack Overflow, which is suppose to promote community assistance and development, is bringing down the majority by exposing the minority, when the main reason why we are all here is to learn.  I do think that a system where everyone is equally exposed on the website would be better. The reputation system would remain, but it would be private, just like the money in your bank account. There would be no bias, and the point system would still work as intended (good = +1, neutral = 0, bad = -1). In fact, it would be similar to the Reddit approach (to some extent), which is in my opinion a way more friendly one.  Any toughts?
14719
Is there any reason behind the ghost reputation we gain on the meta of a Stack Exchange site? This reputation doesn't add up to anything, but it still shows me I have gained some. Is this supposed to make any sense?
12389
I get the point of having a minimum reputation to use the new chat feature. However, I was hoping my 2K reputation from Stack Overflow would be enough - but it looks like I need to acquire 20 rep here on Meta Stack Exchange.  So my question is - should this restriction be moved?
73686
I logged in today and saw that 15 of my reputation points had vanished. When I opened the reputation tab, I noticed that even though at the top it showed -15, it didn't list exactly where or how my reputation went. Even the reputation counts for today and yesterday show nothing. Is this a bug of some sort?
110336
There seems to be a bug on some sites right now. , for instance, the "month" tab (/users?tab=Reputation&amp;filter=month) says that it's the score from 2016-08-01 but some users show their rep from the start of July onward.  It's not like that for everyone. For example, my own month's reputation shows (as it always has before) the figures for August only -- as it does for many other people.  Here's figures for CrossValidated (stats.SE); whuber (circled) and I earn fairly similar reputation amounts week to week. He and I have almost the same quarterly reputation, but his monthly is showing his reputation since the start of July, while mine shows only a few days of reputation.    vs    Is this a bug? Or some temporary issue?
29895
I just came across a question by a new contributor to a Stack (in this case, ), as indicated by the new contributor indicator. Since it was an ID request, I launched into a comment linking to  and was about to invite them on the [tour], when I checked their network accounts and found that they had 17k+ rep on Stack Overflow.  Now I know that not everyone will welcome new contributors like that, but still, it would be useful to have an indication if a new contributor is new to Stack Exchange and may not even realise they can edit their own posts (yes, I've encountered those; self-answering just to add new information), or merely new to the current Stack and may only need a couple of pointers on topicality and tagging conventions. Likewise, someone may be a regular on the main Stack, but new to meta.  So please, expand the new contributor indicator to indicate if a user is new to the current Stack, new to the current Meta, new to Meta in general, or new to the Stack Exchange Network.    I realise that a reputation of 101 may indicate a user having received the association bonus, so they may have some experience elsewhere on the Stack Exchange Network. However, that doesn't tell me if they're 200+ on their highest reputation account, or 20k+. The former may still need some help using basic features while the latter doesn't.    I came across a request to . That sounds useful as well, so I've edited my question to incorporate that request.