Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 153 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

This question already has an answer here:

I have been reviewing close voted questions for a while now. And I am not feeling encouraged to close questions since the numbers are just growing. I feel really responsible for allowing SO to have so many badly formatted questions to be around. May I request that we review our close vote policy to make the following changes

  1. Should need about 2-3 votes utmost to decide if a question is closed
  2. If someone with a reputation / minimum gold badges closes a question, it should not need more than one more person to vote to close.

Overall, that would help bring down that 84.1k questions down.

More over, the number of clicks it takes to close a question is too much, 4 now (worst case). I suggest making this a 2 click process. At least until we can get some control on that huge 84.1k questions.

Edit : OR lets just start a campaign to close and bring that huge number down. In short it annoys me to see such a huge number of questions under review :).

Edit 30th Jan 2014 : The number of questions have increased dramatically, there by reducing the quality of our system. I urge the moderators to make closing of questions easier. Today, frankly, the correct reasons are not chosen since its easier to say "Unclear what you are asking", in one click. Its really painful to close. The number of votes needed is REALLY high. I suggest that we systematically make changes.

  1. Blanket close all questions that have 4 votes
  2. No reopening of questions, a bad question has under gone 4 mins of review, is bad enough
  3. Prioritize 3 votes for all reviewers (line them up earlier)
  4. Once we have lesser than 5% questions with 4 votes, reduce the votes needed to 3 votes
  5. At this time prioritize 2 vote questions for reviewers.

My point is, it used to be hard to get into SO. Now its easy, and easy to get away, we have 112k questions for review. And I have stopped reviewing, its just too painful.

Edit 1st Feb 2014 : Close votes increase 1k every day 112.6k now. Wake up, SO is the only community that is high quality, lets keep it that day. WAKE UP!!

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by hims056, Martijn Pieters, Emrakul, ben is uǝq backwards, Lance Roberts Oct 19 '13 at 17:37

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

It's down from at least 60k. So by this time next year it might be only 20k! But seriously, we're probably lucky it's going down at all, let alone the backlog. Because that is a massive backlog – Ben Brocka Oct 18 '12 at 13:21 There are a lot of recent questions on this. Do we just predict how big it will be this time next year, and do nothing? Who from The Company has responsiblity for this situation? Whatever solution(s) is/are attempted probably need some coding work, and certainly up-front analysis is needed, which must generate remedial action as well. – Bill Woodger Oct 19 '13 at 10:39
@BillWoodger I'm just wondering whether all our suggestions are falling on deaf ears (and why said ears are deaf), whether none of them are deemed worthy or isn't it high enough priority. (And I don't mean this in a nasty way, I'd really like to know @ any mod or SE staff member) – Dukeling Oct 19 '13 at 15:12
@Dukeling That's the conclusion I'm heading towards. If it is not a problem for The Company (I don't really know what to call "them", but I guess it is the people who make the decisions about what work is done) then we can whistle up what we like. If it is a problem, why not share thoughts on what is being considered. Lots of things have been suggested. There is no shortage there, but then... normal service simply resumes, queue grows. Until the people who do the work/schedule the work tell us what's happening, perhaps we should stop suggesting. If the silence continues, we just let it be? – Bill Woodger Oct 19 '13 at 15:25
Queue is down 400 since this morning. Everyone keep plugging away for 100 days, day in, day out, no direction, no feedback. That's not a Community. Or it is a Community with, but with Us and Them. – Bill Woodger Oct 19 '13 at 15:40
@BillWoodger In all fairness to "them" (Stack Exchange), there are 17k+ users that can vote to close (not sure how many are active). If even 10% of these users would spend all their votes every day for just one week (that's more than 1700*40 = 68000 votes a day), the queue would be empty at the end of it (that's why a few of my suggestions are simply cosmetic - to encourage users to help). – Dukeling Oct 19 '13 at 17:12
@Siddharth I don't think posts with different suggestions to the same problem are (or at least should be) considered duplicates of each other. – Dukeling Oct 19 '13 at 17:15
@Dukeling OK. How to contact them? Even if there is some incentive for them? Are 10% already involved? 1%? 23.748%? Even the question this is marked duplicate of has only been viewed 2006 times. What percentage of those 17k+ are coming here, are aware, are even interested in doing something about it? How many will remain interested enough to keep it from rising to 40K by this time next year? Is there some sub-set to hit first, to see the thing coming down? Can the really tricky ones be identified so Moderators and big-rep uses can hit those? – Bill Woodger Oct 19 '13 at 19:46
@BillWoodger How to contact them? With a popup, probably (I suggested that too). Incentive? Yeah, there's been a suggestion or two about that. Are 10% already involved? Very unlikely. If even 5% (2%?) were moderately involved, the queue would've been cleared a long time ago. Good suggestion - excessively skipped questions (if these exist) should be given to mods. Overcomplicated extension - use some basic machine learning to determine which questions to give to which users to minimize skipping based on the questions they skip. – Dukeling Oct 19 '13 at 19:55
@Dukeling We don't know its overcomplicated. Perhaps the queue can be prioritised for user-level that way. Zero or not many skips, open to the 3k. Lots of skips, high-level (perhaps with fewer votes needed?) and Moderators. Needs code-work. Needs analysis to formulate an effective strategy. Trying something is one way, but with analysis the most likely somethings can be tried first. Who does the code? Who does the analysis? Maybe the analysis is some whizz with the downloadable data, but it's not happened yet. – Bill Woodger Oct 19 '13 at 20:20
@Dukeling Well, I've started a question for someone to do it. – Bill Woodger Oct 19 '13 at 20:27

If someone with a reputation / minimum gold badges closes a question, it should not need more than one more person to vote to close.

Mods can close questions with one vote. I do think 100k (50k?) users probably have enough experience on the site to be awarded the same privilege.

Badges have no impact on anything (that I know of) (except the badge counts, obviously), and it should stay that way.

Should need about 2-3 votes utmost to decide if a question is closed

I don't think 2-3 3k users should be allowed to close questions. Many of them simply don't have enough experience on the site to know what's appropriate.

Perhaps allow only 3 10k (20k?) users to close questions.

See this question for my take on the above 2 points, and many others.

The number of clicks it takes to close a question is too much

2 clicks will likely lead to an overcomplicated UI or more vague close reasons, neither are good.

share|improve this answer

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