# How serial does serial upvoting need to be?

I had a -10 serial upvote reversal today. I was a bit puzzled since I had not seen much activity on my account recently. It seems that yesterday, someone upvoted two of my answers on neutron stars and the algorithm decided this was serial upvoting.

Is upvoting two answers, even in quick succession, really "serial upvoting"? How long do you have to wait between upvoting two answers by the same user to avoid this?

Or is it that the serial voter was upvoting lots of answers in a short period of time and only two of them were mine (which would make more sense)?

• It’s probably this cleanup of a bug which permits double-voting.
– rob Mod
Jun 27 at 10:04
• @rob you mean someone had upvoted physics.stackexchange.com/q/143853 sometime in the distant past and then upvoted it again yesterday? Jun 27 at 10:16
• The SE software allows moderators to monitor invalidated votes, so I can answer that one: No, not yesterday. The user giving the invalidated vote has not been logged on in almost 6 months.
– Qmechanic Mod
Jun 27 at 11:41
• A similar post on MSO (also -10): Voting corrected for a single vote Jun 27 at 14:16

## 1 Answer

As rob mentions in a comment, voting reversals that don't seem to correspond to serial voting are almost certainly due to a cleanup of duplicate votes which is running this week for the first time in the site's history.

They don't explain exactly of what nature the race conditions are that allow a user to vote for a post twice, but if you got a single vote (which the -10 indicates - remember that questions and answer both grant 10 reputation for an upvote since a few years) reversed by this then that means that some user voted for one of your posts twice (likely by accident, not deliberately abusing the race conditions).

So don't worry, there's no serial voting involved here, but a different cleanup of illegitimate votes and the help center text for voting reversals just hasn't been changed yet to indicate this.

• The bug report, including instructions on how to reproduce the duplicate-voting bug and a warning that doing so intentionally would be an abuse of the system.
– rob Mod
Jun 27 at 15:35
• maybe it would be a good idea to ask for more explicit explanations than "voting corrected". I also had one of my answer or question so corrected, and was equally puzzled by the somewhat obscure and generic message accompanying the entry. Jun 27 at 17:52