Recently a question came up on SO which was very poor and IMO it was not a real question*. I considered some options, but ended up leaving a comment and a downvote on the question; hoping to prompt a response.
When one didn't come after some time, I voted to close as NARQ since no one can fully answer the question. Now I tend to flag for moderator attention when I give up on a question and ask for it to be closed so that there are no unsightly "dangling" questions that I forget to come back to later... I like leaving anything I look at tidy.
In this particular instance, my flag was declined with the reason being:
declined - It's only been an hour! The guy may have the runs. Just take it easy for a bit.
Now granted, it's possible the OP could have come back and updated (he didn't BTW), but IMO when you post a bad question and get a number of comments back right away saying it can't be reproduced, it's fair game to be closed at any point. This is not a permanent procedure, that's what
reopen are for; because of this, I feel there shouldn't be a time window on when the requests to close a question come in.
So here's my questions:
- How long do others wait before flagging a question?
- Is there, somewhere on meta, a consensus/FAQ regarding the wait time before asking for a mod to help close a bad question?
- Pointed more at moderators (and with luck whoever the specific moderator who wrote that was), is this a common feeling that it's bad form to ask for help closing a bad question after an hour of inactivity? I had assumed if the moderator felt not enough time had passed he/she would simply ignore my flag for another hour or two or whatever, then come back to it.
* I say it's not a real question because the issue can't be reproduced by anyone, and the real code/tool versions weren't given so we couldn't check the OP's work.