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.

I just reached the 3k rep limit required for close votes and have started exploring the vote-to-close UI that's opened up to me, and I have a request.

The review queue has a Do Not Close button, but when I click the close link under a question that has close votes (i.e. it shows close (1)), there isn't an option for me to vote against closing the question. I came across a question that had a vote to close it as not a question, but it had just been updated with code and more details and was no longer a candidate for closing. However, I couldn't cast a vote to not close it from the question itself. When I clicked on close, it brought up the usual voting UI, and "Do Not Close" was not an option.

TL;DR, do this:

  1. Open a question in the close votes review queue
  2. Note the Do Not Close button
  3. Click the question title to go to it
  4. Click the close (n) link under the question (assuming it hasn't already been closed)
  5. Notice the lack of an equivalent "Do Not Close" option

Could a "Do Not Close" option be added to the close button popup for questions that already have close votes, that way the review interface isn't the only place a "Do Not Close" vote can be cast?

Edit: Okay, so 5 3 "Do Not Close" votes kicks it out of the review queue, it doesn't have "no effect" as suggested in the comments. (See this question, in which the answer from Shog9 was just updated a few minutes ago to say 3 DNC votes.) I still don't see why the same DNC option can't be available from the question.

Basically, I guess I would like some rationale behind this bullet point from Shog9's response to this question:

Only accessible from the review queue (so rather difficult to target a specific question). Yes, this is very much by-design.

share|improve this question
4  
I don't believe that the "Do Not Close" option is actually a vote against closing, it's more of a "I've reviewed it and have elected not to vote to close". –  jonsca Oct 15 '12 at 23:19
    
@jonsca That's not the impression I had, but I could be wrong, see this question. –  Brian Oct 15 '12 at 23:21
2  
Relevant: What exactly happens with the new “Do Not Close”? –  Bart Oct 15 '12 at 23:23
    
From Shog9's answer to that question: Voting against closing does not override anyone's close vote. I wasn't aware of his other point that 5 "do not close"s can kick it out of the queue (and starts the existing votes aging away), so technically if you are voting on something that is in the queue from outside, I suppose it could be useful. –  jonsca Oct 15 '12 at 23:25
    
This is the same request as How about a vote not to close option? with the minor difference that that question predates the close vote /review queue and the Do not close button. –  Josh Caswell Oct 16 '12 at 1:02
1  
Heck, it already gets misused plenty in the review task, why not just spread the abuse all over the site?? –  animuson Oct 16 '12 at 2:58

2 Answers 2

up vote 5 down vote accepted

The goal of /review is to expose these posts to a broader audience, and collect enough evaluations to approximate an objective answer to the question, "should this be closed?" Without the "Leave Open" response, questions would be very likely to hang around until they were closed regardless of merit.

If you have an interest in a specific question, and feel strongly that it shouldn't be closed, there are better options than a weak 'do not close': fix whatever problems exist by editing, rebut any invalid charges against it, perhaps even write a good answer that implicitly refutes "unanswerable" concerns, and then - if it still ends up closed - vote to re-open. Providing a "leave open" option in this context works against this by simultaneously being the easiest, least-helpful, and least-effective response.

And as I noted in my answer here, I've no interest in a more powerful "don't close" vote that creates gridlock and implicitly discourages efforts to correct problems with a question.

A better idea here would be to take the productive actions outlined above and silently interpret them in the same fashion as a "Leave Open" response in /review. This would then put folks viewing the question in /review and those viewing it organically on a more equal footing, while still encouraging productive and corrective actions rather than pointless battles.

share|improve this answer
    
Great to hear from the source of the answers I've been reading, thanks for your response. I feel like adding comments doesn't always help, and more often than not, the question gets closed anyway by people not reading the comments in the review queue. Perhaps a better way of keeping track of the questions I've commented on that have been closed would help, or a reminder to encourage the people reviewing to fully read any comments related to closing the question. That's probably better off in its own feature request, though. –  Brian Nov 30 '12 at 15:38
1  
@Brian: I make a habit of periodically going back through questions I've commented on (using my profile's "activity" tab) - it's not a sure-fire way to keep track of stuff, but chances are if I've left a long, detailed comment somewhere I'm interested in the outcome. –  Shog9 Nov 30 '12 at 17:19

No, and this is by design. As you can imagine, there are so many users on Stack Overflow that, if one could vote against a close vote, nothing would ever get closed that should be closed, and nothing would ever get reopened that should be reopened.

Keep in mind that the purpose of closing a question is to give the community time to fix the problems with it. In many cases, when a question is reopened, it's done so after members of the community have edited the question to remove any possible issues with the question. Even if the question was borderline and was voted to close, in general, such questions still get edited and improved to help avoid another group of 5 users coming by and voting to close. If you can't convince people the question is good as-is, then just simply fix those problems so that those folks have nothing to complain about anymore. ;)

This is a good thing, and the system works. Questions that are closed will either stay closed, or get improved, convincing more people to vote to reopen.

With items in the review queue, what happens is this: When 5 "Do Not Close" votes accrue, the post is simply removed from the review queue, and the close votes start to age. The question still maintains the number of close votes, and the post is still visible to moderators and 10K users in the moderation tools.

share|improve this answer
    
I never said the system was broken. The 5 "Do Not Close" votes is a great way of doing it. (Did I say that somewhere?) The question that was linked in the question comments by Bart made it clear this is how it worked. But if voting against closing a question is possible in the review queue, why can't it be possible from the question itself? I fail to see how you've addressed that. Could you be more clear on why that would be a bad idea? –  Brian Oct 16 '12 at 1:32
1  
@Brian: You're not voting against closing the question. Your "vote" does not negate or alter the close/non-closed status of the question. It simply removes it from the review queue; you haven't impacted user close voting at all. –  Nicol Bolas Oct 16 '12 at 4:48
1  
Hi Brian, that explanation is in the last paragraph. 'When 5 "Do Not Close" votes accrue, the post is simply removed from the review queue, and the close votes start to age. The question still maintains the number of close votes...'. In other words, as Nicol points out, those "do not close" votes in the review queue don't count against actual close votes. Hope this helps! –  jmort253 Oct 16 '12 at 4:58

You must log in to answer this question.

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