The good news is that I dug through the history and awarded you the 50 points for committing to SmugMug.
The bad news... is that I had to recalculate the rep on your profile, which basically looks over all pending vote changes (we don't automatically recalculate on Area 51 like we do on Q&A sites) and that adjusted your A51 reputation waaaay down.
When I committed, I was asked to enter my name and my email. Even though I used the same email address that I used for all other StackExchange accounts, it wasn't able to recognize me. This is a bug in Area51. Below I explain a strategy to reduce the chance of this happening, and a solution if it does happen:
First sign into StackExchange: https://...
I have taken the time to show how I did it, starting from here:
This takes me to the page:
I filled in my Name, Email and Password, and then clicked Sign-Up.
This showed up:
I got an email to join "Meta Stack Exchange":
I clicked "confirm", then went back to Materials Modeling and clicked "Follow", which lead me here:
Then I had to confirm another email....
Typically, identicons are created based on a hash of your email address. But since you started using Area 51 as a non-registered user, the identicon was generated based on your last known IP address.
The identicon doesn't change automatically when you register, so I went into the "change your picture" function and simply re-selected the 'use identicon' ...
You are looking at two different accounts:
Your regular Area 51 account
Your account on Area 51 discuss
The Area 51 dissussion site is the 'meta' site for Area 51, see the Area 51 discuss FAQ. Your reputation there is entirely derived from the main site, but the reputation is synched once an hour or so. Just wait a little while and you'll have 51 points in ...
Your rep was recalculated, it happens all the time on Area 51. You had points from proposal(s) that have been deleted, those points do not exist anymore, so they don't show up after recalculation.
You are currently at 263 Rep, so if you lost a 1,000 you probably had gained most or all of it from one proposal. I assume you were aware that the proposal had ...
We're aware of the issue, but we're not sure what exactly is going on. As far as we know, it's not something on our end. Gravatar seems to be serving different identicons for the same hash but different requested sizes... and only sometimes.
Marc Gravell wrote up some more details here: https://diy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1218/hmm-something-funny-...
The proposal has reached Commitment. You can't do anything to the questions now - those questions were for defining the scope of the proposal - that's why it's the Definition stage (orange).
Now it's in the Commitment stage (green). This is where we check if there are enough users who are committed to participating in the site when it launches. Since the ...
If I want to commit to any other, I have to uncommit or any of the committed site must be launched in beta.
Not quite true—the site must be launched and you follow through on your commitment to that site:
I commit to participate actively in [site] for at least three months, especially during the private beta, and to ask or answer at least ten questions.
In addition to your four questions (prior to this one), you've also had six additional questions which have since been removed through the routine maintenance of proposals.
At some point, you must have had five active questions on the site at once to earn the badge. Even if you've since dropped below that that prerequisite five… once a badge is ...
This is simply an artifact of caching, and is usually the culprit wherever you see two numbers that supposedly represent the same thing differ slightly. You'll notice this on Pets SE when it moves into the private beta, until a few hundred questions get into the system.
It's a small performance trade-off to eliminate quite a few queries on each proposal ...
It is a user preference.
At the top of the list of example questions, there are four options for sorting questions. 'My vote', 'active', 'newest' & 'votes'
You can choose how they are sorted. Sometimes I accidentally sort them differently, I imagine this is what just happened to you.
Yes, when a proposal is deleted, any discussion uniquely associated with that proposal is removed with it. In the post you linked, you cited many prior discussions, but it was linked to only one proposal (which was subsequently removed because it failed to complete the minimum submission requirements).
I understand that assuming a discussion is moot every ...
A major changes to Google Analytics infrastructure has been done which caused the issue which is status-completed now.
As answered by the developer, Dean Ward at Traffic (views, visits) isn't correctly registered on Site Analytics or Area 51:
Apologies for the slow response here in completely resolving the issue. We made major changes to our Google ...
This being Area 51, the sort order is determined by the original proposal date, not how long the resulting site has been active. Since proposals of the past were once allowed to exist over a very long period of time before finally launching, the sort order looks off (by site age)… but it is correct (by original proposal date).
Each tab only shows the proposals that belong under that sort (hot proposals, beta sites, launched sites, etc). If you take a look at the Professional category (for example), you'll noticed that every proposal does not show up under every tab.
hot tab, 6
progress tab, 1
beta tab, 5
launched tab, 2
newest tab, 6
I am glad you asked this question because already several people told me they had the same problem, but I just assumed that they were telling me that they had joined my Area51 "just to be nice" and didn't actually join. There was an example of someone that says she followed the proposal, but then it still said "only 1 follower" which was me.
Did you also ...
I don't see that this user was ever committed to the proposal. It's harder to determine that when the proposal no longer shows up in the Current Commitments section, but a couple things indicate there was never an initial commitment:
Instead of browsing through the entire list of users, you can total of the user's reputation across all sites and sort the ...
The auto-logging-in-between-multiple-sites functionality is called universal login. Universal login is implemented for our Q&A sites (which Area 51 Discussions is also one).
However, the Area 51 main site is not based on the same codebase, and does not have universal login. So you will need to log in to Area 51 separately. You will still be linked to ...
This is by design. The 50 rep is as you described it. The 100 reputation is an account association bonus (essentially, a head start for having another account on the network with 200+ reputation). They are unrelated.
I used my Google account to create my user i was able to see my profile has unregistered and i wasn't able to login.
To fix it I use an anonymous tab in chrome and registered my user again, then i re login and was able login.
Probably a cookie that created an inconsistency in the system
I noticed same problem at my proposal and I think I found the answer.
This problem will happen if the user that you refer clicks on the Commit button, but doesn't confirm his email address.
In this case you will get notification that you referred someone, but you won't get any reputation bonus until that person confirms his/her email address.
It's 2018 now, and all of Stack Exchange should be on HTTPS, even Area 51. But logging in to Area 51 using SE OpenID with HTTPS Everywhere is still broken, giving the following error:
Unable to log in with your OpenID provider:
The openid.return_to parameter (http://area51.stackexchange.com/users/authenticate/?s=11111111-1111-1111-1111-111111111111&...
I played around with it and there's no question but that HTTPS Everywhere breaks a ton of stuff on Area 51. But that's because we are still rolling out SSL support. Historically, when major changes are deployed, Area 51 is among the last subdomain to get updated. That's largely because Area 51 is running on an older version of the software. There's no ...