0

In this question the current version is not answerable, but I think if the user wanted to it could be edited into shape. However after pointing this out, and the user providing an edit the question is still in poor shape.

My question is, should it qualify as low quality even if it could be edited but there is no effort put forth to actually provide the useful edit?

1
  • 1
    I believe I have seen VLQ described as meaning roughly "this cannot be salvaged by any normal community process; a mod needs to step in". Link only answers are the only exception that I've seen mentioned to this general rule of thumb.
    – joran
    Aug 13, 2013 at 21:14

1 Answer 1

7

My question is, should it qualify as low quality even if it could be edited but there is no effort put forth to actually provide the useful edit?

Then you shouldn't flag as VLQ. The idea of VLQ is that it's impossible to redeem, not that nobody has bothered to redeem it.

A downvote is a valid response to a poor question, even one that could be improved. It's even more applicable when the OP has shown a lack of indication to improve the post.

The question also appears to meet criteria for closure, so flagging it for that reason would also be appropriate. (VLQ generally means you think it should be deleted, not just closed.) Since you're asserting that there isn't enough information to answer the question, "unclear what you're asking" seems appropriate. "Too broad" also seems applicable. (There is in fact a vote for each of these currently.)

1
  • That was my feeling as well, I just checking. Thanks!
    – asawyer
    Aug 13, 2013 at 21:58

You must log in to answer this question.

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