19

I've noticed that users can always view delete/undelete votes on their own posts, regardless of their reputation. However, it takes 250 reputation to view close/reopen votes on your own posts. I can certainly understand why it takes some rep to view close votes, but why don't you need any reputation to view delete votes?

24

So... That's actually a really good question. There is a reason, but it's kinda locked up in the history of the close tool, so it isn't entirely obvious... And perhaps it has outlived its usefulness.

The first hint to this past comes from the privilege itself: while it's called "View Close Votes", if you read the description carefully...

This privilege allows you to view and cast close and reopen votes on your own questions.

Emphasis mine. As you can see, the privilege gives you something beyond just viewing others' votes... You can vote yourself too, a full 2750 points before you'll be able to vote to close or reopen on anyone else's questions. That's... Actually a pretty good privilege: any question author with >= 250 rep can reduce the effort needed to reopen their question by 20%. We... Maybe buried the lede a bit on that privilege name.

But that's where the history comes in: prior to 2009, there was no "close voting" - privileged users could unilaterally close or reopen any question. That made this privilege a heck of a lot more powerful: at 250 rep, you could close or reopen your own questions whenever you felt like it. Since there were no votes, there was no "view votes" privilege - at 250 rep you simply earned the "Close your questions" privilege.

So in a sense, this privilege is somewhat vestigial, and somewhat of a consolation prize: it exists because a much better privilege used to exist there, and this is the closest we can get now.

See also:

5

Since you can delete your posts no matter how much rep you have, it would be difficult to change the UI to view delete votes while being unable to delete.

If you can't vote to close, the "close" button has no need to appear, so SE doesn't need to change anything merely to make users unable to see the close votes of their posts.

  • I don't understand the last sentence, could you clarify what you mean by "pass". – Jesse Steele Jan 4 at 2:31
  • @JesseSteele I edited mine. – U9-Forward Jan 4 at 2:33
  • I made some tweaks so I could understand the first paragraph, mainly. But I still don't understand "pass" / "get through"... Get through what? – Jesse Steele Jan 4 at 2:36
  • @JesseSteele Can easily hide the "close" button, since users can't close. – U9-Forward Jan 4 at 2:37
  • @JesseSteele Ya can do another edit. – U9-Forward Jan 4 at 2:37
  • Who can can easily hide the close button? Do you mean the SE employees should make a change to do this? Or, do you mean it is easier to do things this current way? – Jesse Steele Jan 4 at 2:39
  • @JesseSteele Clearer? – U9-Forward Jan 4 at 2:40
  • Is that what you mean? – Jesse Steele Jan 4 at 2:42
  • @JesseSteele Yup, you got it.. – U9-Forward Jan 4 at 2:42
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – Jesse Steele Jan 4 at 2:43
2

Closing is a higher action with greater ramifications. The current flow allows users to learn with deleting first.

Seeing something doesn't make sense unless you can do something about it.

Not only would the employees need to write a separate interface to be able to "view without voting", providing the additional information to a user who can't change anything would only serve the purpose of curiosity.

So, viewing/voting on delete and viewing/voting on close should probably stay as they are.

You must log in to answer this question.

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