What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

Possible Duplicate:
Close/Reopen Votes - Sliding Scale For Threshold

I think that the number of votes required to re-open a question should be lower than the number of votes required to close it.

The reason being that once a question is closed very fewer people visit that question to check and see if it has been edited, and if it is worth for re-opening (or if the original reason for closure was incorrect and has been explained in comments)

I know that its possible to flag such questions for moderator attention, however I don't like doing that - it seems like an abuse of the flag button when there is an existing mechanism that is meant to deal with re-opening questions.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by XMLbog, random, LeakyCode, Ladybug Killer, dmckee Jan 15 '10 at 14:32

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.

4  
How is this in any way a duplicate of that question!? That question covers increasing the threshold for re-opening, not decreasing! –  Justin Jan 15 '10 at 14:35

2 Answers 2

Totally agree!

I predict this question will be closed because this was already discussed when Stack Overflow had 20k users. :)

share|improve this answer

When you ask a question, by default, it's open. It takes 5 people to close it. If you have 3k+ 250 reputation, you have a vote to reopen your own question. There's no point in giving more bonus points.

share|improve this answer
2  
But there is a bit of an avalanche effect. Usually there isn't even time for the OP to defend himself or edit the question. –  John the Seagull Jan 15 '10 at 13:54
1  
Vinko: Let's not forget that 90% of the closed questions are really crap and have zero chance for survival. The rest are controversial. Increasing close votes will affect the 90% unquestionably bad questions too. We should not forget that when we make these kind of decisions. Besides, the OP is able to edit a closed question while it's closed and make it re-open worthy. –  LeakyCode Jan 15 '10 at 13:56
    
I doubt that the 90% of crap would really be affected. But the problem is choosing a better value. 3 might be too little and 4 is ugly. So it indeed might be okay to leave it as is :) –  John the Seagull Jan 15 '10 at 14:02
    
The 90% crap may not be affected in rush hours, but in quiet hours, it's hard to find 5 people to close blatant spam, let alone other things. –  LeakyCode Jan 15 '10 at 14:06
    
In quiet hours you just flag 'em. –  John the Seagull Jan 15 '10 at 14:07
    
And no moderator is there to see it ;) –  LeakyCode Jan 15 '10 at 14:08
    
90% of the closed questions never even get 1 vote to re-open, hence wouldn't be affected. The controversial questions are different however typically are CW, and so could (in theory) be subject to different limits. –  Justin Jan 15 '10 at 14:08
    
@Kragen: I'm actually a proponent of anti-close votes. That will solve both problems, I guess. –  LeakyCode Jan 15 '10 at 14:11
    
@Mehrdad: So they quietly wait until the next day :P –  John the Seagull Jan 15 '10 at 14:21
1  
I guess - its just fustrating the number of genuine people I see that for various reasons ask poorly worded questions. There are a number of people (like myself) who are willing to put the effort into moulding some of these into better questions and helping these people, but once a question gets closed its almost impossible to re-open it again - even when it does resemble a proper question. –  Justin Jan 15 '10 at 14:25
    
They've changed the vote-to-reopen rep requirement for your own questions. It's 250 now. See the FAQ. –  dmckee Jan 15 '10 at 14:31
    
dmckee: Didn't know that. –  LeakyCode Jan 15 '10 at 14:32

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