3

On graduated sites with designs, the ability to bindingly edit posts is given to users at 2,000 rep, and the ability to vote to close and reopen posts is given at 3,000 rep. However, on beta and graduated sites without designs, the ability to edit posts is given at 1,000 rep, and the ability to vote to close at...500.

Notice that on designed sites, one needs more rep to vote to close than to edit. But on beta sites, one needs more rep to edit than to vote to close.

Why did SE make the decision to implement it this way? In my opinion, it makes more sense for all users who can vote to close to have the ability to edit, on all sites.

(Please note that this is a neutral question, and not a request to change this.)

2

I think this is still a remnant from the time that sites were expected to be in Beta for a short period of time (6-8 weeks instead of 6-8 years). During that time, it was vital to settle on a scope quickly, and give the community the tools to enforce this scope. Therefore, the privilege for close votes (and reopen votes) was drastically lowered. This was deemed more important than making small changes to posts.

Note that during the private beta phase, you don't even need reputation to cast close and reopen votes.

  • 1
    I think you mean "6-8 weeks instead of '6-8 weeks'". – Dukeling Sep 26 '18 at 12:21
  • You are completely right, but that would confuse many readers which are not familiar with Meta. – Glorfindel Sep 26 '18 at 12:23

You must log in to answer this question.

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