If you go to a user page, it has a link on "vote casts" to http://judaism.stackexchange.com/users/208/joe-shmoe?tab=votes

This page is reported to be a 404.

If I don't have permission to see more info about the user's voting history, why is there this link?

See also on MSO: “View more” Votes profile button link broken?

share
1  
FWIW, mods can't either, voting is completely anonymous. Good find! –  HodofHod Jun 5 '12 at 0:41
    
Should this be not redirected to the main meta? –  Naftali Jun 5 '12 at 15:00
    
@Naftali, no, SE's rule is that bug reports can be on any site's meta. –  msh210 Jun 5 '12 at 17:21
    
@msh210 haha yes I realize that, but when it can affect the system as a whole, it is usually a good idea to put it on main meta as well –  Naftali Jun 5 '12 at 17:40
1  
@msh210 duplicate: meta.stackexchange.com/q/134108/155556 –  Naftali Jun 5 '12 at 17:42
    
@Naftali considering that there (as you found, thanks) a post on this on MSO already, I don't think they'd look too kindly on our migrating this one there. –  msh210 Jun 5 '12 at 18:14
    
@msh210 not migrating, but closing this one and directing people to the duplicate ^_^ –  Naftali Jun 5 '12 at 18:14
    
@Naftali, SE policy is not to redirect to MSO. –  Isaac Moses Jun 5 '12 at 18:44
    
@IsaacMoses yes, but this is a duplicate :-) –  Naftali Jun 5 '12 at 18:48
    
@Naftali, please read the post I linked to. This is not a duplicate; it's a parallel instance of the same issue in a different context. The correct response is to cross-reference, not to close. We would only close this question as a duplicate if it was a duplicate of another question here on Meta.J.SE. –  Isaac Moses Jun 5 '12 at 18:55
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

The "view more" link will no longer be shown if you're not viewing your own profile.

A fix will be pushed in the next build, after rev 2012.6.6.2794.

share
    
And the section heading, which is also a link? –  Monica Cellio Jun 6 '12 at 12:48
    
Great point, I always forget about those headers being links, maybe because they don't look like links :P - I've checked in a fix, which will be pushed out in a few hours. –  Jarrod Dixon Jun 6 '12 at 15:56
    
I noticed my cursor change, but I think I would have tried clicking there anyway because the "tabs" above are links, establishing the "header text = link" pattern for me. Now that you mention it, I've never clicked on the "more" links at the bottoms of sections. –  Monica Cellio Jun 6 '12 at 16:41
add comment

Because somebody has permission -- just not you.

I just went to Shmuel Brin's user page and saw the following tabs (only): summary, answers, questions, tags, badges, favorites, bounties, reputation, activity. I only see a votes tab on my own page. (I do see now that the "votes" section header at the bottom of the page is a link on everyone's page.) The URL exists because there's one person who has access. So 403 (forbidden) might be more appropriate than 404 (not found), but "no page for you" when trying to view someone else's votes tab seems correct to me.

share
2  
So why provide me with a link to your page? –  Shmuel Brin Jun 5 '12 at 3:41
3  
I love this idea! A 403 = Forbidden page is exactly what we need! And I know the perfect picture to go with it.... "this little piggy went to market.. and this little piggy is FORBIDDEN!!!" –  HodofHod Jun 5 '12 at 3:52
1  
Btw, ^^^ is not sarcastic, though perhaps I shouldn't have so much sugar so late at night.... –  HodofHod Jun 5 '12 at 3:54
    
@ShmuelBrin I think it's just too much unnecessary hassle to put the link there only sometimes. ie it's there because it's sometimes used, even if you can't. –  Double AA Jun 5 '12 at 5:53
    
@ShmuelBrin, I think it's worth asking if their implementation supports repressing that link (while keeping the text for the section heading as a non-link). They can obviously include or exclude the tab at the top, but that's "whole block in or out", not "block with link or block without link". –  Monica Cellio Jun 5 '12 at 12:59
    
@HodofHod, I love it! If SE will implement that return code (which they should do everywhere, not just for Mi Yodeya, though we'll be the only ones with the piggy). It looks to me as if 403 is the right return code here, but I haven't worked with this stuff all that much so I could be wrong. –  Monica Cellio Jun 5 '12 at 13:00
1  
@MonicaCellio I agree. In certain cases, (e.g., moderator tools) I can understand why it would return a 404, but here, where we already know such a page exists, a 403 makes more sense. –  HodofHod Jun 5 '12 at 13:04
    
@HodofHod considering that they have a mod faq on meta.se, they aren't hiding the mod-only features too well –  Shmuel Brin Jun 5 '12 at 18:30
    
@ShmuelBrin The mod faq does not cover all of the moderator tools, and certainly not their URL's. –  HodofHod Jun 5 '12 at 19:30
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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