While reviewing a question, I could not decide between two options for closure reasons:

  • Questions asking for code must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved. Include attempted solutions, why they didn't work, and the expected results.
  • unclear what you're asking

It was a short question looking for a direct answer and decided on the second one and voted.

But after a few minutes of thinking, I decided first option is suited better. Since closure reason is the key for the question owner to see how he can fix his question, I decided to change closure reason. Since I could not change the closure reason, I tried to retract my closure vote and then re-vote. But after retracting my vote, system do not let me to vote again.

Is there a reason for not enabling re-vote after retraction? Also will not it be better if revoting/changing closure reason is enabled?

  • Does it really matter that much? While your intent is good, you're showing a lot of indecision and that isn't a good behaviour to exhibiting when you have the power to vote.
    – slugster
    Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 11:15
  • There are two things; first I do not vote for closure if I am not sure, and second is as I mentioned, closure reason is the key for the question owner to see how he must edit his question. And finally, I am not talking about to close or not to close but question lacks of many aspects it must have to be an answerable question in SO.
    – Mp0int
    Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 11:24
  • 2
    I think it sounds like in this case either choice would apply. Bring able to change close vote reasons might encourage too much... oscillation. Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 11:48
  • The way I see it - if you are unsure, "Unclear" it is ;) I mean, it only falls into "lack of code" if you understood his need right.
    – Mołot
    Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 13:35
  • Duplicate question is a better example in here, because closing a question and forwarding users to somewhere else is different then simply closing the question. But also requiring moderator attention is quite much, since a simple solution can handle this situation and remove moderator attention need.
    – Mp0int
    Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 13:51
  • Do consider that the tie breaker condition is the most recent vote. Thus, if the question morphs then one of the later cv casters can 'fix' the ultimate reason for the closure. It doesn't handle all the cases (3x unclear, morph, 2x dup - its still unclear), but it does handle some (1 unclear, morph, 2 broad, morph, 2 dup).
    – user213963
    Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 14:26

1 Answer 1


I agree that the fixed list of reasons to close do not perfectly fit every situation. I would suggest that, in the future, you might leave a constructive comment that explains how the question might be remedied. This will resolve any ambiguity provided by the close reason, and will be far more helpful for the author.

For some of the rationale behind the choices provided when you close a question, see The War of the Closes blog entry.

In terms of why you cannot vote to close again, this is by design. In a comment to Can we have the ability to retract a close vote before it closes?, Jarrod Nixon states that he basically implemented animuson's suggestion, and in the discussion there, animuson explains why you shouldn't be able to vote again:

Well, allowing them to vote again would allow them to quickly retract their vote then vote to close again to bump it back into the Close Votes queue after receiving enough Leave Open votes to kick it out. It's just as prone to abuse. Once you've cast your vote, you've cast your vote. That shouldn't be undoable.

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