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.

Since close votes expires during the bounty's duration, the current solution is to flag the post and get a mod involved. Why should mods need to be involved? We don't allow questions with bounties to receive close votes. It should go both ways.

For similar reasons, someone suggested that bounties not be allowed on recently reopened questions. The answer was that:

The questions that, usually, go through multiple, swift, close/reopen cycles are those that are currently being discussed on meta or new ones, i.e. those that are not yet eligible for a bounty.

It then went into the "flag for mod" answer. I'm not familiar with other sites, but on Gaming, we close two day old questions all the time. If a question slips through the cracks and doesn't get closed right away, it is usually days or even weeks before the issue is brought back up.

The "flag for mod" answer works, but it seems unnecessarily complicated. What if a mod isn't around? It would be much simpler to simply disallow bounties on questions with close votes. Now that we can take close votes back, we don't even have to wait if a question with close votes gets fixed.

share|improve this question
1  
This seems to be a symptom of a larger problem: It should be possible to close a question in less than two days, but the close queue on SO is a living breathing nightmare in desperate need of cleanup. –  Michael Hampton Jul 16 '13 at 2:09
3  
@MichaelHampton: That happens because some questions are so uninteresting they never get the necessary views to achieve close velocity. –  Robert Harvey Jul 16 '13 at 4:21
    
@MichaelHampton The problem is they don't get that first vote to end up in the queue. Sometimes there is also disagreement about whether or not they need to be closed. In any case, a bounty just interferes with the process. –  Origami Robot Jul 16 '13 at 4:48
    
Isn't this called "on hold" and not "closed" now? –  A.M. Jul 16 '13 at 16:17
    
@A.M. On-hold is just closed with a different name (for the first five days). –  Robert Harvey Jul 17 '13 at 20:28
    
@RobertHarvey Thanks. I assumed we were moving to the new term entirely. Let's hope this doesn't cause much confusion. At very least, "close votes" should probably be called "hold votes", since people can only put a question on hold. Only the mighty clock (and I suppose admin action outside the normal hold-close procedure) can close it. –  A.M. Jul 17 '13 at 20:38
    
@A.M. No, they really are close votes. People don't really put questions "On Hold." "On hold" is just a display change; in every other way, they act like genuine close votes. –  Robert Harvey Jul 17 '13 at 20:40
    
@RobertHarvey That's a path-dependent conclusion. ;) –  A.M. Jul 17 '13 at 20:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .