Just to make my position clear, I'm opposed to the concept of any one person having powers to close questions, but am aware of the circumstances that have led to this being implemented.

That said, I don't think that the right metric has been used to award the hammer.

I would be far more convinced that this is a good idea if wielders of this power were chosen on the basis of the reliability of their previous close votes.

Technical knowledge is not the same skill as judicial powers.

The ratio of correct close votes that a user has made (i.e. votes cast that actually contribute to the ultimate closure of a question) could easily be calculated. If the ratio is high enough over a minimum number of votes then they could be awarded the hammer.

  • 6
    Given that the capability only applies to closing as duplicate, it seems like technical knowledge is probably more relevant in that case.
    – Tim Stone
    May 21, 2014 at 1:53
  • @TimStone ...but technical knowledge is implicit with a high ratio of correct close votes, and it filters out those users who make snap judgements and get it wrong. Two birds, one stone...
    – spender
    May 21, 2014 at 2:07
  • 2
    Only if the close votes are for duplicate questions, but yes, that's true. I'm not sure there's really any significant reason for concern though, other than to say "doing it this way might technically be a bit more appropriate."
    – Tim Stone
    May 21, 2014 at 2:14


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .