11
\$\begingroup\$

I often feel that questions linger too long before being closed, collecting answers making it difficult to edit a closed question. I would like EE.SE to take part in the recent site-wide "three-vote close" experiment. The main meta post can explain it better than I can:

Testing three-vote close and reopen on 13 network sites

I believe that closing a "questionable question" quickly will lead to better quality over all. Closing a question is not a punishment, nor is it the same as deleting it. A question is closed because it has problems that should be fixed before answers start to arrive. As soon as an answer is posted, editing the question is more complicated.

As far as I understand it, it will also be easier to reopen a closed question — something I also approve of.

\$\endgroup\$
10
  • \$\begingroup\$ Could we get our site moved to a three close vote? \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike Mod
    May 6 at 18:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ Worth a try I would say. But there could be concerns of autocracy. \$\endgroup\$
    – Mitu Raj
    May 6 at 20:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @mituraj please explain \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike Mod
    May 7 at 3:05
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I mean it would go less democratic, with a fewer set of people now controlling closing and re-opening. @VoltageSpike \$\endgroup\$
    – Mitu Raj
    May 7 at 3:42
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yes, both processes would be faster. There is not a good reason for a close vote que if it doesn't work fast. Bad questions get answers and no correction \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike Mod
    May 7 at 3:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ So, is this going to be implemented here soon? \$\endgroup\$
    – Mitu Raj
    May 7 at 11:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ As you noted in the post, we conducted a test on 13 network sites — please stay tuned for the results of that step and next steps on this. \$\endgroup\$
    – JNat StaffMod
    Jul 9 at 10:41
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Can you tell us all how the close queue currently works? I never really understood it. Does a "leave open" vote cancel a close vote, or does the question close with the first 5 close votes? \$\endgroup\$ Jul 9 at 17:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ The latter. The theory is that if five high-rep users thing a question should be closed, that's enough initiative, I think. \$\endgroup\$
    – mmmm
    Jul 13 at 17:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ Are there site statistics about the number of questions that remain at 3 or 4 course votes for say 4 days or longer? Feels like the number of questions that hit three, but never five, close votes is so negligible that if makes little sense to worry \$\endgroup\$
    – mmmm
    Jul 13 at 17:35
15
\$\begingroup\$

I support moving to a three close vote (if SE will allow it). The close review que has been hovering from 100-200 questions that need to be reviewed for quite sometime (at least 6 months) which means we have too many question that need to be reviewing or not enough people that review. Moving to three votes would make reviewing much more effective. I believe it is more important that questions get reviewed so that these actions can happen quickly.

There are a few other comments that I have:

If you haven't read this now would be a good time: https://electronics.stackexchange.com/help/closed-questions

If we do move to a three close vote I have a reminder for those who do review.

If the question can be fixed, then edit it and make it presentable.

Help new users understand the process, many people think that closing is bad and take offense. Its good to say something on the lines of: "We need to see X and Y improvements from this question, edit it and reopen it" and help them understand the process (obviously this does not apply to questions that can't be made on topic because of their subject matter, not everyone will take the time to fix their question).

If we do move to a three close vote we will also need to step up helping people understand the process (and not being condescending) because the closing process will happen much more rapidly. Also helping new users understand the voting system is a good thing.

In addition I believe users need 3000 rep to get their question reopened (https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/reopen-questions) so we would also need people helping to get questions reopened (or flagged for reopeneing if you don't have the rep) after the question has been fixed and help people understand this process.

(EDIT: now that I think about it edits will move the question to the reopen que)

Having more good questions benefits everyone, those who want to gain rep and those who want their question answered and those who visit the site for years to come to look at the question.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ This system has been live on SO for quite some time now and it works just fine. The main benefit being that crap questions get closed in a much more timely fashion. \$\endgroup\$
    – Lundin
    May 6 at 14:18
10
\$\begingroup\$

I agree with OP, I think OP is the best. Let's do it!

But seriously, this answer is here so that people who agree can upvote, and those who disagree can downvote.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ I need this to stay so the CM's can see it \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike Mod
    May 11 at 16:09
0
\$\begingroup\$

I don't know whether a 3-vote close is a good thing or not, but don't see a real upside to participating in the test. I'd rather wait and see how the test works out and any additional tweaks are made until adopting the policy.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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