I asked Could we allow users to challenge moderators' decisions? but it was marked as a duplicate. But I believe it isn't a duplicate because the questions linked to are asking how to use a feature that already exists in Stack Exchange, while mine is asking if we could implement a new feature.

  • 11
    The "moderators" didn't claim anything... it was closed by users. None of the close voters have mod diamonds. Stop calling people mods when they're not. – Catija Apr 4 '16 at 19:13
  • 2
    @Catija Technically, almost all users are "moderators" to a degree. We all have the ability to "moderate" content in one form or another. For instance, voting and flagging. (Which is probably the reason for the line "and yes I am using that word, they are moderators by definition" in the question.) – Kendra Apr 4 '16 at 19:16
  • 7
    @Kendra That doesn't change the fact that "moderator" is a title here and when used in a complaint, it makes the issue unclear. Saying that users closed the question is much more clear (and accurate) than saying that the question was closed by moderators. Intentionally misusing the term is being done for effect and is not helping his complaint. – Catija Apr 4 '16 at 19:17
  • 1
    @Kendra by your (and his) logic, Cole is also a moderator, and thus is asking himself to justify his decision... – KutuluMike Apr 4 '16 at 19:18
  • @KutuluMike And he should justify his decision- His decision to disagree with the assessment of other "moderators" who happened to feel his question was a duplicate. That justification should then be edited into the original question in such a way as to clarify it and make it clearer it's not a duplicate. (If it indeed isn't- I feel it is.) – Kendra Apr 4 '16 at 19:19
  • 1
    @Catija And if Cole wasn't using "moderator" as a title but to describe the action the users were taking? They were moderating the content, therefore in action they were moderators. It's still technically correct. – Kendra Apr 4 '16 at 19:22
  • 5
    @Cole You seem to misunderstand the very concept of SE being self moderated community. The users themselves perform most of the moderation, and the actual moderators only supervise and step in when required, or to speed things up. – Shadow Wizard is Ear For You Apr 4 '16 at 21:08
  • 2
    Imho , this question isn't asking what to do when a question is already closed... it seem instead to be challenging the fact that question in different categories (support VS feature request) can be used as duplicate target in the first place. In that way, it doesn't seem a dupe, or at least not a dupe of the currently linked question. – BlueSoul Apr 5 '16 at 11:38

In general, you should edit your original question to clarify why it's not a duplicate rather than bringing up a new question. If you can't do that convincingly, the question will remain closed… because you did not convince enough people (5 with 3k rep, or 1 with a gold badge or diamond) that your assertion that the questions are different is correct. (This was explained on the answers to the other question, incidentally.)

But a feature-request for a feature that already exists is definitely a duplicate of a support question asking what feature to use for the same purpose — both are answered by pointing to the appropriate usage of the existing functionality. Which you should be using, rather than asking for a feature that already exists.


It's a roundabout way of declining your request. You're asking for a way to handle your question being closed, and that (admittedly more broad) question already has several answers.

And you should note that the people that close your question (or put it on hold) are not "always right". Those banners list multiple user names, because it's done by voting, which means that it's not just one person's word against your question - several other people agree. In the case where only one user name is listed, (gold badge duplicate closers, diamond moderator actions), you can still go to that site's meta to ask about and challenge the closure.

  • 1
    Not only did that handful of people vote that @Cole's question was a duplicate but the other 470 people who could be voting the other way have not. I would say that the community is saying in an overwhelming way that it can be considered a duplicate and that the software behaviour that it requests is unwarranted. – PolyGeo Apr 4 '16 at 22:44
  • @PolyGeo: That statistic is a bit misleading; 95+% of those who could vote to reopen in principle have probably not actually seen the question. Out of ~170 views, I would not put money on more than 20 or so being those with CV privileges. That's certainly more than enough to reopen in principle, but it's far less than some definitely-not-duplicate questions have required to be reopened. It's more the downvotes that provide the overwhelming response. – Nathan Tuggy Apr 4 '16 at 22:56
  • @NathanTuggy You're right, on both counts, over time a larger percentage will see the question and choose to vote one way or the other but most will not have yet. – PolyGeo Apr 4 '16 at 23:00

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