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.

The question in question.

I voted to close as Not A Real Question, becoming the third or fourth voter to do so. After commenting on an answer, I reloaded to find there were no close votes listed.

enter image description here

Thinking something funny, I went to re-vote closure, and found that my close vote was still recorded. Not only that, I still have all of today's close votes.

enter image description here

What happened here? Moderator action?


I've added a bounty to this question, preferably answerable by a moderator. I'd really like to know:

  1. Was the clearing of close votes intentional?
  2. If so, why? Not just in general, but for this specific question. I'd like to note that the question is closed now, and currently sits at -9.
share|improve this question
1  
moderator voted to reopen - stackoverflow.com/posts/6106701/revisions - binding? edit: looks like not binding I can voted to close. May be it should display "49" votes remaining instead of "50" –  YOU May 24 '11 at 7:57
    
Ah, that's surely it. I'd like to know what caused Gumbo to change his mind. It looks like he was the fifth vote, so even if he wasn't using his diamond-given powers here, his close vote would have been legit. –  Charles May 24 '11 at 8:00
2  
@Charles, that's just a workaround of clearing close votes, IMHO. –  YOU May 24 '11 at 8:01
2  
That only raises more questions, then. It's a poor question, witness the user's reaction in the comments when asked about improving it. If this was done to clear the close votes, why was this done? –  Charles May 24 '11 at 8:04
    
Simply because of he disagree with all of the us, IMHO. –  YOU May 24 '11 at 8:06
    
Meh. I edited it and voted to reopen. It's not like it couldn't be saved - it was quite obvious what he was asking (after he added a few comments), it's a programming question, etc, etc, etc. Of course, had he merely turned to the PHP manual entry on strings he would have had his answer with no additional aggravation... –  Adam Davis May 26 '11 at 18:12
    
@Adam, thanks for the edit, though I'm not sure I'm going to throw in a reopen vote or not. I'm not sure that the edit captures the original question very well, even given the minor detail that the OP added in the comments (before he started insulting people, comments now removed). –  Charles May 26 '11 at 18:25
    
@Charles He got his answer. We have a chance to turn this into a great question and answer, and make it a good resource for future idiots who don't read the manual. –  Adam Davis May 26 '11 at 18:28
    
@Adam, you make a good argument. Consider adding an answer here as well. –  Charles May 26 '11 at 18:31
    
[status-by-design], answered by a dev. I've refunded the bounty. –  Robert Harvey May 31 '11 at 4:54
    
@Robert, while I am not objecting to the refund, the goal of the bounty was not (just) a technical explanation, but an explanation of the actual question reopening. –  Charles May 31 '11 at 5:40

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

You voted to close right before Gumbo did, and he immediately reopened the question, as shown in the Revisions.

Your "close votes remaining" quota didn't change because when a close/reopen state change occurs, we soft-delete the old votes (making it easier for a lazy dev to track the current active vote count).

As a side-effect of this soft-deletion, you're refunded that close vote, since only undeleted votes are counted against your quota. So while you can't vote to close again on the same question, you can vote to close another question!

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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