Timeline for Make the FAQ clear on how a question can be reopened
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 3, 2020 at 13:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Oct 20, 2012 at 8:27 | comment | added | jmort253 | @slhck - Sure, and I think that adding more details is necessary, but not all at once. Keep the message simple at first. No more than a sentence or one line at first. If we overwhelm people with a wall of text without warning, their fight or flight response gets triggered. But if we first whet their curiosity with a short, brief action item, then we may mentally prepare them for a bit more information in bite-sized chunks, possibly even the page you've proposed in the question body. ;) The main ideas to take from this is to start off simple, and not start off with CLOSED! Muahahahaha! | |
| Oct 20, 2012 at 8:22 | comment | added | slhck |
Good points. Note that my primary intention was to have a written explanation for those people who do want to read, who do improve their questions but never get them reopened because simply no one finds out about their improvements in the first place if they don't flag for moderator attention or post on Meta. At least that's how it was on Super User. Now that we have a reopen queue, my suggestions have become somewhat irrelevant, but we still need to find a better way to convey, "Hey, if you do improve your post, we'll consider reopening it!".
|
|
| Oct 20, 2012 at 8:17 | history | answered | jmort253 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |