Sometimes, when close-voting, the question gets closed and subsequently reopened in very short order. If attempting to recast a close-vote, this dialogue appears:

Close vote panel, telling me I can't vote to close again after retracting.

It tells me that I can't vote to close again after retracting, which would be true if I had retracted the close-vote. I hadn't:

  • I didn't retract. My close vote was valid and contributed to the question being closed.

  • The question was immediately reopened by one with that power/privilege resulting in the notice above on the close menu.

Expected behaviour:

  • Panels should reflect that the vote was not retracted.

Related sync issue if the timing of close/reopen makes a difference.

Another post re panel notices and vote-retractions, marked status-completed, but not.

  • 7
    Where do we stand on this? I ran into the same problem today and was quite surprised to see that message. I casted a close vote, the question got closed, then reopened by a power user. I later found an exact duplicate, but can't vote again.
    – MrUpsidown
    Commented Nov 7, 2023 at 15:28
  • 1
    @MrUpsidown it's waiting along with 214 other items to be reviewed by developers, and hopefully fixed. Sadly, it can take anywhere between few minutes, and several years. (And can also be rejected as "not in our roadmap" or "too complex to fix") Commented Jan 11 at 14:52
  • 1
    Related: (Movies & TV SE) The close vote reason isn't working properly? Commented Jun 3 at 9:19

1 Answer 1


I have experienced this many times too. I recently ran into this issue here on this question (linked in case it can help to identify and fix the bug). I had voted to close it as "duplicate" and it had been reopened. I again tried to vote to close it, but couldn't as I got the exact same message as OP:

You cannot vote again after retracting your vote

This is exasperating as obviously I haven't "retracted" my vote. I suspect that this a bug related to a feature displaying the wrong message. The feature may be:

  1. To block a user from casting a vote again till a certain time has elapsed. (The bottom of the pop-up does point out "You voted to close this question xx min / hours / days ago").

  2. To block the same user from casting votes again on a "controversial" closed-reopened question to allow more community members to review the question.

  3. Moderator intervention to block a user from voting on a particular question.

In all cases, the message that you have retracted a vote offers a poor user experience as it is literally gaslighting - telling a user they have done some particular action when they explicitly haven't. Someone should clarify what is really going on. If it is a bug, please state so officially, and post some status update as it hasn't been fixed yet after nearly two years since it was reported?

  • You're really making it into something much bigger than what it is. Like most other bugs, it's a simple overlook, which the team has not found the time (yet?) to look into and fix. Commented Jan 11 at 14:50
  • 1
    Don't get me wrong. I'm not a fan of the way SE works these days, especially the way it's managed. However, in this aspect, of fixing small bugs, there is work being done, I can't deny that, and I don't think they make such bugs on purpose. Commented Jan 11 at 14:51
  • 3
    To suggest that this is gaslighting seems to be personifying the software that runs the sites. Or are you suggesting that SE is deliberately trying to confuse us? My personal experience here indicates it's more likely to just be a bit of additional code that's needed. Priorities being what they are, it may never get done.
    – W.O.
    Commented Jan 11 at 14:51
  • @ShadowWizardLoveZelda Sigh. I am simply pointing out why the message is irritating to users and thus needs to be updated. And if it is a bug, an answer should be posted that this is a bug that is being worked on.
    – sfxedit
    Commented Jan 11 at 15:02
  • @W.O. I was simply pointing how the message is literally "gaslighting" - telling a user they did something when they haven't. That's a bad user experience. Right?
    – sfxedit
    Commented Jan 11 at 15:05
  • 2
    No doubt this is bad experience, sure. But the bug is just wrong wording. No ill intentions here, that's my point. Commented Jan 11 at 15:09
  • 1
    The addition by staff of the [status-review] tag is acknowledgment it's a bug (or I take it that way at least). I've never read the tag description 'till now, but it states: "Indicates that the circumstances behind a bug report are set to be internally reviewed," etc.. @sfxedit
    – W.O.
    Commented Jan 11 at 15:31
  • 1
    This does not really answer the question. If you have a different question, you can ask it by clicking Ask Question. To get notified when this question gets new answers, you can follow this question. You can also add a bounty to draw more attention to this question. - From Review Commented Jan 11 at 15:35
  • 1
    @RobertLongson about NAA, it's in the grey zone IMO, being more like a comment, but too long to be a comment, so I'd say just leave it. Commented Jan 11 at 15:54

You must log in to answer this question.

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