7

Take a look at Server Fault. Only 17 Users, 2 Moderators, and 4 Admin/Developers can vote to close.

I don't know where Meta will be more popular or less popular than Server Fault, but would there be value in lowering the rep requirements for actions? I'm most specifically interested in Close and Open votes. Those are the votes that most guide the community - defining what is and isn't appropriate. Until the community itself is making them, it's up to the moderators to wield the heavy stick. And I'm wondering about the judgement call cases.

Should Meta, SF, or both, have lower rep limits?

Improve this question

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
7

One factor:

Since meta.* does NOT allow anonymous participation, we arguably should relax the rep limits on voting and commenting. I propose:

  • rep required to vote: 1
  • rep required to comment: 1

I'm leaving the offensive (15 rep) and downvote (100 rep) requirements, though.

Improve this answer
3
  • Sounds good .
    – Ólafur Waage
    Commented Jun 29, 2009 at 0:53
  • I would upvote, but I don't yet have the reputation to do so.
    – Captain Segfault
    Commented Jul 11, 2009 at 0:24
  • Segfault, you would if you visited the "associate" tab on your user page.. :)
    – Jeff Atwood
    Commented Jul 11, 2009 at 9:43
1

SF is self correcting over time; it just requires more moderator intervention early on until enough users achieve 3,000+ reputation.

I'm not sure what will happen here. I don't think closing is as relevant on meta.

If you feel something should be closed as spam or offensive, but don't have the reputation to vote for it, just flag it for moderator attention.

Improve this answer

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