Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates


After voting to close a question, users who voted should be notified whether or not the question was closed.

I understand that the criteria for determining whether or not the question was closed is a bit tricky. It would probably have to be based on whether the question was closed N number of hours after the first close vote was cast.


This notification will help users vote more intelligently when casting close votes by allowing them to see when they voted properly and when they didn't.

Currently, once a close vote is cast, unless you keep the question open in another tab or mark it as a favorite, it's easy to lose track of it.

share|improve this question
Duplicate of… - Fully agree with this proposal, I had 20+ upvotes on a question which was closed as a duplicate of the one above (…), I put the rep from those as a bounty on the duplicate, still no joy. – jrturton Dec 9 '11 at 14:53
Please don't put tags in titles. I'm on mobile so I can't search for a link, but Jeff specifically says not to do that. I added your tag to this questions tags; it doesn't need to be cluttering up the title. – John Dec 9 '11 at 16:10
@John, your edited title "Can we get a notification of the outcome of cast close votes?" was overly verbose. Vote to close is not just a tag, it's an action. "comments" is a tag. Does that mean that I can't ask a question that has "comments" in the title? I've found that posting questions/requests on this meta site is the hardest part of my day. This is a darn tough crowd. – James Hill Dec 9 '11 at 16:12
There's a big difference between "Comments - How to post them?" and "How do I post a comment?" "it's fine to put whatever you think makes sense in the title organically, so long as it is not in brackets at the start of the title. – Jeff Atwood♦" While not in brackets, I daresay separating it with a dash is no better. Also, you might be interested in "How do I participate in Meta Stack Overflow and not die trying?" ;) – John Dec 9 '11 at 17:05
@JamesHill People are not attacking your questions, they're trying to improve them and it seems you're fighting them back by edit-warring, and it's edit warring that is not cool (and typically results in the original author losing out). – badp Dec 9 '11 at 17:42
@James: every change gets battled. That's by-design. In the fires of meta, ideas are refined. That doesn't mean it's an inherently bad idea, that folks hate you, or don't respect you, or whatever - if anything, it means they take you seriously enough to ask that you justify what you're asking for, answer their questions, address their concerns, etc. – Shog9 Dec 9 '11 at 18:07
@Shog9, I understand and agree completely. Honestly, I always regret getting into these types of battles in comments. Obviously, I haven't fully learned my lesson. My only issue was with the initial edit to my title and then subsequent chastisement when I changed it back. Obviously, I should have let it drop. Petty (matter of opinion) edits irritate me. No excuse for a comment war though... – James Hill Dec 9 '11 at 18:39

Please don't. Votes to close expire for a reason. There's no point in making people come back to the same question every three days until the question they want closed actually gets closed.

That would be simply toxic.

The other notification you'd get is what a question you voted to close gets closed. That is going to become really old really fast and eventually drive people to vote to close less because they don't want to get garbage in their StackExchange™ MultiCollider SuperDropdown™

share|improve this answer
Definitely agree; it would either be a lot of noise on the successful ones, or just encouraging people to repeatedly vote to close when they fail. Not good at all, either way. – Andrew Barber Dec 9 '11 at 17:43
They can't recast close votes after they've expired anyway, so even them coming back would be pointless. – Tim Stone Dec 9 '11 at 17:54
@TimStone Well, they'll turn to flagging. It's still nothing even remotely worthy of belonging to the StackExchange™ MultiCollider SuperDropdown™. – badp Dec 9 '11 at 17:55
I agree entirely. – Tim Stone Dec 9 '11 at 17:58
@TimStone Oh, I didn't know that. (since I've never tried to do it... hehe) Nice to know; that was a good call feature-wise. – Andrew Barber Dec 9 '11 at 18:01
@badp, What if it wasn't a notification as much as a summary page - almost identical to the flagging page. Would that be more appropriate/better idea or do you think it's worthless data? – James Hill Dec 9 '11 at 18:46
@JamesHill It might be more approrpiate then. – badp Dec 9 '11 at 19:50

By the time a user hits 3k, and is able to cast close votes, they should already have a solid idea of whether or not a question should be closed, they shouldn't need to be taught. If a lot of users are casting bad votes, then that's a reason to increase the reputation required to cast close votes, but not a reason to add your feature, since (as badp noted) it will create a lot of noise.

share|improve this answer
Good point; I think one side-effect of something like this would be lots more meta questions, "Was it appropriate to vote to close X question?" – Andrew Barber Dec 9 '11 at 18:15

You must log in to answer this question.

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