The workflow for getting a question reopened is you edit to improve the question, use the 'Add to review' checkbox or cast a reopen vote yourself to push your question into the Reopen votes queue, where reviewers either vote to reopen your question or vote to leave closed from review.

This works much of the time; your question is reopened if your improvements resolved the close reason or removed from review if not.

But I have observed that different questions have differing, what I call 'queue priority,' or chance of actually being shown to reviewers or being reviewed. This is demonstrated by the fact that clicking Review tasks (to find a new task without marking the current one as skipped) will often show the same task over and over*, meaning that particular task has a 'high priority' by some internal algorithm, even though there are hundreds of other available tasks that my filters would allow.

The problem is on the contrary, some tasks appear to have a very low priority, or are otherwise filtered by most of the active reviewers, which results in reviews being separated by many days or weeks. This alone is not a problem, and no one is 'entitled' to have their question reviewed in a timely manner. The only inconvenience should be just having to wait a while to get your question reopened.

But what is frustrating is trying to get a 'low queue priority' type question reopened, if the existing votes expire faster than new votes come in, even if the question has received enough, or more than enough reopen votes in total to be reopened. This also wastes the time of the reviewers who voted to reopen the question just to have their vote expire. I have seen this happen to myself and other question authors several times.

My proposal is to prevent reopen votes from expiring, especially those cast from within the review queue, until the question is dequeued (either the task as a whole expires and becomes invalidated after 30 days, or the post is left closed from review). Getting your question reopened should depend on whether reviewers decide the question should be reopened, and not by how the luck of how quickly said reviewers are able to review your question.

*Only in Close votes and Reopen votes, which do not seem to have the 3-minute timer before a viewed task can be shown to someone again.

  • 2
    I have a preference toward (where possible) titling feature-requests in a way that captures the concrete change being requested- the preference being over the choice of a title which only captures the motivation. I believe its better because its helpful when skimming search results, since multiple Q&A can be about the same motivation. "where possible means" if the post suggests a concrete solution, instead of leaving that to discussion in answer posts. but I won't impose.
    – starball
    Commented Apr 5 at 1:31
  • 3
    @starball This is also true when a question gets tagged as status-review - the title is what gets saved in the internal ticket, so having a title that doesn't reflect the request's purpose will decrease the chance it gets noticed or create confusion. As an example, a site once requested that both questions and answers from unregistered users be blocked, and this was mentioned in the body, but the title only mentioned questions, so the team mistakenly only implemented a question block and not an answer block. Commented Apr 11 at 18:07


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .