What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

It says in the faq:

Why was my feature/bug declined or closed without explanation?

Meta Stack Overflow has been around for a while, and as a result, many issues have been considered in the past. If your feature request has been marked as or without a comment, it is likely because there is another question that approaches the same topic and a conclusion has been reached. Perhaps you could try searching for your idea with different search terms, hopefully that will find the original discussion.

This should never happen. If a feature request is closed for either of these reasons, there should be an explanation.

Now, if it is closed because it was discussed before, it should be closed as duplicate, and tagged status-* additionally.

I think the current version doesn't convey any useful information and is at best misleading. So it should be changed not only in wording but also in meaning or removed altogether.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

My only thought here is that the FAQ is there for a reason:

To prevent the mods here from having to provide explanations for every single request (and every possible variation) that comes in. Instead of repeating themselves, they add the tag and move on.

The FAQ is meant to explain some of the more popular actions taken here, so you don't have to ask why. The obligation is on you to locate the prior discussion. I'm sure they have enough to do.

share|improve this answer
    
Yes, obviously. My point was, that such a question should be "closed as duplicate", which will include a message that it was closed as duplicate (in other words, a reason). You don't have to first go to the faq to figure out why your feature-request was declined, it says so right there under your question. –  bitmask Jul 19 '12 at 0:39
    
@bitmask You wrote If a feature request is closed for either of these reasons, there should be an explanation. Again, the FAQ is explaining the reason so the mods don't have to. That is the point of a FAQ. However, I am only guessing. I really have no insight. Only the mods can explain why feature requests are treated this way, while duplicate questions are closed w/explanation. –  JimmyPena Jul 19 '12 at 0:49
    
The relevant part is this: If your feature request has been marked as status-bydesign or status-declined without a comment, it is likely because there is another question that approaches the same topic and a conclusion has been reached. So, the only explanation I would get by this faq is that my question was a duplicate. This is not something I should have to dig out of the faq. It should be immediately communicated by closing a question as a duplicate. In any case, the faq contains irrelevant information. This should not be the case for an faq. –  bitmask Jul 19 '12 at 0:57

Now, if it is closed because it was discussed before, it should be closed as duplicate, and tagged status-* additionally

It might not be an actual duplicate.

For instance, there are an endless variety of suggestions for adding things like private messaging or non-anonymous voting. A lot of them are duplicates, or close enough that they get closed as such. But some are pretty novel. They'll still get declined (no matter how "clever" you get in the implementation, opening up folks to harassment is a bad idea) but they won't necessarily get closed.

If the person declining doesn't comment, there's a pretty good chance that's because the reason is already in someone else's comment, someone else's answer, or one of the questions showing up in the right-hand sidebar.

share|improve this answer
    
I find closing as duplicate gets overused here on meta to link askers to answers on another question anyway. So +1 for not advocating closure on similar requests. –  Anna Lear Jul 19 '12 at 5:34
    
Yeah... I'm a big fan of closing questions that propose superficially-different implementations of problematic features without addressing previous complaints, but not every request or bug report fits previous discussions. –  Shogging through the snow Jul 19 '12 at 6:01
    
So, it's similar enough to warrant no comment, because it's reason is easy to find via search, but it's not a duplicate? Dropping a link or a brief comment still feels more constructive than just retagging and going away. –  bitmask Jul 19 '12 at 8:21
    
@bitmask: my point is that there's nearly always an explanation for the decline to be found; AFAIK, that verbiage is to forestall complaints from folks who've seen stuff declined with no explicit, "official" answer. Comments to the effect of, "see the massively up-voted answer by a community member on your massively down-voted question" are really just noise in most cases. –  Shogging through the snow Jul 19 '12 at 15:57

You must log in to answer this question.

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