What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 130 Stack Exchange communities.

Would it make sense to not count close votes cast from the 10K flagged posts page against the daily limit of 50?

It seems like there's a never-ending stream of crap coming into Stack Overflow, and if I'm already rep-capped, and having an..."unproductive" day at work, being able to plow through the queue without running out of votes seems like it would be a win-win for everyone.

share|improve this question
8  
-1 This would discourage people from thinking about the close votes they are casting. "Hey, I got free close votes. I am just going to close EVERYTHING bwahhahaha" –  NullUserException อ_อ Dec 9 '11 at 20:12
4  
@Problematic - you think that would be a problem with 10K users? –  Adam Rackis Dec 9 '11 at 20:14
1  
I think that will be a problem especially because they are 10k users. –  NullUserException อ_อ Dec 9 '11 at 20:15
1  
@Problematic - scary. Well, you'd probably know better than me. I actually vote to decline flags at least as often as I vote to close. Maybe I'm too soft. –  Adam Rackis Dec 9 '11 at 20:17
    
I'd prefer that you didn't cast "invalid flag" flags, because then I can decline them and decrease the flagger's flag weight. This is of course an artifact of the problematic flag weight system: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/112138/… –  NullUserException อ_อ Dec 9 '11 at 20:25
    
@Problematic - what's the preferred course of action if someone flags a post as VLQ or not a real question, when it isn't? –  Adam Rackis Dec 9 '11 at 20:27
    
The answer to that depends on who you ask. Some mods like it when people flag them as invalid, because it helps them decide. I personally prefer that they are left alone, so I can punish the flagger by subtracting from their FW. But most of these flags are suppressed from the mod queue anyways. –  NullUserException อ_อ Dec 9 '11 at 20:35
    
@Problematic I think the real solution, as you pointed out in that post, is to not give a free ride to people who's flags are disputed. –  Adam Rackis Dec 9 '11 at 20:42

2 Answers 2

I wonder if maybe there's a good reason for limiting them, just to perhaps keep someone from going on an endless flagging/close-voting spree. But I'm often in the same boat as you; finding myself hitting the limits, and wishing I had more.

Perhaps a reputation-based increase in the limit?

share|improve this answer
    
    
Seems like a good compromise. –  Adam Rackis Dec 9 '11 at 20:15

Unlimited is not a good word choice. The reviews are limited per day, so such 'unlimited' votes would be de facto limited by the review limit...

I'm voting for it. Currently, one can run out of close votes after reviewing first votes, low qualities etc., and then find himself in the middle of review where no action can be taken (because the only reasonable action is close and the close votes are gone).

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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