Timeline for Remove question from HNQ if it has close votes
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 2018 at 6:16 | comment | added | gnat | wonder if you have read my prior comment, "questions with close votes were removed from HNQ while they are under review. I mean that this way votes to leave open would end the review and let question get back to hot list, so that 3K users willing keep it open could make a difference" -- this is as far from ignoring leave open votes as it gets | |
| Apr 20, 2018 at 6:14 | comment | added | Charlie Brumbaugh | @gnat You are wanting to ignore the votes of everyone who wants to leave it open and only count the close votes. And if there are few voters chat can be a great way to get more eyeballs on a problem | |
| Apr 20, 2018 at 6:10 | comment | added | gnat | no, sorry but to me this way would be even worse than what we have now by letting close-worthy questions hang in HNQ. I really dislike gang-voting like you suggest. I believe that closing should happen organically in order to keep sane site culture and quirks of irrelevant external network feature (HNQ) seem to be a very poor reason to bend that norm | |
| Apr 19, 2018 at 22:08 | comment | added | Charlie Brumbaugh | @gnat No what I am saying is that if something is off topic and need to be closed to get it off the list, you need to find 4 other users to close it, either via meta post or asking in chat | |
| Apr 19, 2018 at 21:16 | comment | added | gnat | if I understand your reasoning correctly, it would be more fair if questions with close votes were removed from HNQ while they are under review. I mean that this way votes to leave open would end the review and let question get back to hot list, so that 3K users willing keep it open could make a difference. Does that make sense? (this way would be somewhat similar to how regular 2K users currently can control hot questions at sites with enabled mathjax by editing it in and out of question titles) | |
| Apr 19, 2018 at 14:57 | comment | added | Charlie Brumbaugh | @gnat Edited to be more clear | |
| Apr 19, 2018 at 14:56 | history | edited | Charlie Brumbaugh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 50 characters in body
|
| Apr 19, 2018 at 14:11 | comment | added | gnat | agree, that's a good point. Consider editing the answer to help readers see that difference | |
| Apr 19, 2018 at 14:00 | comment | added | Charlie Brumbaugh | @gnat But if closed other members can vote to reopen. What I meant is that if 4 vote to close and 15 choose to leave open, the system shouldn't let the 4 decide. | |
| Apr 19, 2018 at 10:07 | comment | added | gnat | "minority of users determine what gets onto it" -- this is in fact how system works now. When 5 users of this minority vote to close, the question gets off the list (closed questions are excluded from HNQ). Consider editing your post to clarify whether you want to change that or mean something different | |
| Apr 18, 2018 at 22:26 | history | answered | Charlie Brumbaugh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |