To improve first poster experience, can questions have a suspend state before they can be voted for close? [duplicate]

Question

Possible names for this feature:

• "Suspended"
• "Under review"

I am sure newbies find it quite confronting to ask a question and then have it "closed". A suspend state would be more friendly:

• "Suspension" feels less "permanent" than "close"
• A novice poster will feel like they have an opportunity to rectify it (unlike the feeling of "closed")
• A novice poster will feel more welcome in the SE community
• Those with fewer credibility points may have right to moderate suspensions, adding more people to that review queue, leading to faster response after a novice rectifies
• More automation should be possible, because false-positives of "suspension" are not as confronting as a false-positive of "close". Thereby, more suspension/unsuspension can be actioned faster with smaller queues for moderators, and a fast response for novices, being a friendlier experience.

I think it would be simpler if there was a "suspend" state for questions instead.

• We probably wouldn't need Can we have the ability to retract a close vote before it closes?
• We probably wouldn't need How about a "Vote not to close" option to counter the "Vote to close"?
• We probably wouldn't need Add a way for moderators to cast a normal, non binding close/open vote
• We probably wouldn't need Give an incentive for finding duplicate questions

What other feature requests could be nullified by this idea?

Design:

• There should be fewer votes to suspend - making administration lighter
• It should unsuspend after being edited by the OP or another editor
• A suspended question MAY BE closed automatically by the system if left unedited after suspension for X days
• The usual close rules will apply, but likely with fewer votes needed for closing/reopening, but more review queue work to be focused on the suspend/unsuspend than on closing/reopening
• People should still be able to post answers. Such answers can help show a reviewer (who doesn't understand the niche technology) whether it is a more specialised Q/A or whether it truly is duplicate. The ability to still get answers for a "suspended" question would be much more friendly to novices and those answering alike

Is this a good design?

Answer 1

We've actually already tried doing something like this via an "on hold" state. While that change was active, closed questions would instead show as "on hold" for the first five days to encourage users to edit questions and be more friendly to new users.

However, further research showed that none of that actually happened and that the "on hold" label had little to no effect. It was recently removed with the post notice changes because it was not a useful feature.

Your request essentially wants to do the same thing, and for the same reasons, but with even more complicating factors integrated into it. But past experience has shown that it will not achieve what you desire.

Answer 2

There is another Q that deals with something similar: Every "close" has its thorn: replace "close" with "on hold" for the first five days

They confirm the anecdotal and peer-agreed notion that "closed" sounds final:

The word "closed" sounds final. Now, we don't mean it to - but right out of the gate, we're leading with a word that tends to evoke finality. Sure, things can be "closed" for repairs, but that's not the most common use of the word. Think of when someone says they've "closed" an issue, or an application, or or a real estate purchase, or a forum thread.

The mechanics for this idea differ to the "on hold" idea:

During the [on hold] period, the only difference is the temporary verbiage change; all the closing mechanics remain the same, so it still can't get new answers, etc.

In this idea, people can still post answers, and editing changes the review status.

Even the name of the feature could impact success (of both user experience and reopen queues): "on hold" has a particular connotation, "suspend" might have a totally different impact even though the meaning is similar, "under review" might be the best. In marketing, multivariate testing is used to gather information across multiple options. Essentially we want to test the "user experience" question once and for all, and we don't know what the best solution is.

From @animuson:

Closed questions would instead show as "on hold" for the first five days to encourage users to edit questions and be more friendly to new users.

This question intends to improve the user experience for novices. Was "niceness" measured for the "on hold" experiment?

From New Post Notices are live network-wide:

"On Hold" had been used to label recently closed questions. The idea was that this language would imply less permanence to the current state than "Closed". However, user research showed that this distinction was generally found to be confusing to users at all levels, and did not seem to have an effect on reopen rates. So we have removed this label. All Closed posts are now labeled as Closed but only the label has changed. Edits within the first five days will still put the question in the reopen queue.

The intention of this feature is not to primarily reduce the queue size. I can tell you now the OP for "on hold" and my post here about the adverse user experience appears to be widely accepted.