Was voting to close a question as 'Not a real question', but my mouse slipped to 'Blatantly Offensive'.

Would it be possible to have some means of changing my close reason, before it gets closed?

  • 19
    Maybe the blatantly offensive part was your (lack of) mouse skills. – Hilarious Comedy Pesto Jun 29 '09 at 20:39
  • 1
    @pesto You are fabulously inflammatory. – jjnguy Jun 29 '09 at 20:54
  • 7
    @pesto - your comment is blatantly offensive :-P ;-) – toolkit Jul 1 '09 at 17:51
  • 1
    Another example (more common with me) is marking the wrong site for off-topic... – Nicholas Riley Feb 20 '11 at 2:01
  • Pay more attention to what you are doing, are you sure you want to format your computer? Please note that one close reason that was off doesn't matter, it does contribute to the 5 close votes and the majority will choose the right close vote reason anyway... – Tamara Wijsman Nov 4 '11 at 18:16
  • 3
    Tom. My lack of motor skills is not the same as not paying attention. – toolkit Jul 27 '12 at 19:50
  • @DannyBeckett this is however implemented other as the OP would wish (not possible to change the vote, only retract) so it's an independent feature request. – Danubian Sailor Jan 31 '14 at 9:44

Yeah, i'd like this too... Of course, if we could retract close votes, that would solve this problem as well.

| improve this answer | |
  • 3
    +1: Totally agree. I'd prefer the retraction before a change of vote type of thing... – RSolberg Nov 4 '09 at 21:50
  • 2
    24 upvotes (or more) and accepted answer just for saying "yeah, me too"?!? And since we now have retract close votes, it is clear this does not help with changing a vote – musefan Aug 30 '13 at 12:46
  • 18
    Well we got the ability to retract, but there's still no way to make a correction to the close reason since once you retract you can't vote to close again. – j08691 Sep 20 '13 at 14:04
  • 3
    -1: I agree with @j08691. There's still no way to make the correction. – Jim G. Dec 9 '13 at 15:48
  • 1
    We can now retract close votes; but you can't re-vote to close with a different reason, so it doesn't actually solve this problem? – KutuluMike May 6 '17 at 14:25

Given the recent changes to voting that allow users to retract their own votes, I think the next logical step is to consider implementing this feature.

Generally speaking, I see 3 cases where one might want to change a voting reason

  1. Mis-click - typos happen and a user clicks the wrong radio button before clicking "close" (as the example in the question shows)
  2. Misreading of the question - you see this happen frequently, someone reads the question one way, votes to close, and then rereads a question and sees the original reason is not applicable, but another reason is better.
  3. The question changes - through comments and editing, the OP changes the question so the original reason isn't valid, but a different reason is more applicable

The 3rd point is the main reason why I think this feature would be valuable, and a big reason why is because of all of the effort that has been put into revamping the close system in the recent months. We wanted the close/on-hold reasons to provide as much useful information to the OP as possible, but how useful is it when the reason is wrong?

Ideally, the close reason would be dynamic and allow someone to change their reason up to the point that the question gets reopened, to allow for editing that doesn't quite fix the post but changes the reason why it is closed. But at a minimum, at least allow a close voter to change his vote up until the question is closed.

This feature would work very nicely alongside Notify close voters when a closed question gets edited so the close voter gets notified of edits so they can revisit their close reason.

| improve this answer | |

The issue has come up again on M.SF.

Change or retract a vote to close

Sometimes askers fix their question. Other times an dupe is identified while 3 votes are already cast and it really needs to be closed that way.

| improve this answer | |

I believe it lists the reason as the most "popular" reason anyway, so in the grand scheme of things, it shouldn't matter too much

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    Yes, but the herd mentality sometimes sets in, where other voters choose the same reason as you. – Ether Nov 4 '09 at 21:37

(This supplements, with a concrete example, what @pubsee2003 mentioned as a third reason why this should be allowed.)

Has anyone given a good reason why this is not possible or should not be made possible?

Consider this question, which as originally posted asked for translation from Chinese. I voted to close it as off-topic for that reason. And I added an explanatory comment. Then the OP edited the question to remove/downplay the translation aspect. It still needs to be closed, but now the reason is that the OP did not first look up the meanings of "attend" and "services". Or perhaps the reason should be that the question belongs on English Language Learners and not on EL&U.

Why should I not be allowed to change the reason I voted for closing, after the question was changed by the OP editing? What's the rationale for this rule?

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    I don't think there is a good reason why this is not possible or should not be made possible - after all, this is not declined. More likely it's one of the thousands of "nice to have" feature requests, and there will always be more important things for the team to do. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Dec 27 '15 at 7:51
  • @ShadowWizard: If you are right then I suppose that's good news. I wonder, however, how hard this would be to implement. Seems like it would just be a matter of removing/inhibiting the code that expressly prohibits it now. Do you really think this would be a significant detour from "the more important things" (like designing hats and such)? – Drew Dec 27 '15 at 15:19
  • It's not about easy or not easy, even the most trivial change needs few hours work to test, deploy, sanity check etc. The team does sometimes fix trivial bugs, but it's quite rare. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Dec 27 '15 at 15:23
  • @ShadowWizard: OK. Then in that case it would be great to at least get some confirmation that this is desirable and on the wishlist, rather than what the product currently communicates to users: impossible because verboten. IOW, the dev team could weigh in on threads such as this one to say that they agree but it is not the top priority etc. The fact that they haven't done so does not suggest to me that they do agree. But I've seen no rationale for the prohibition... – Drew Dec 27 '15 at 15:31
  • In an ideal world, you're totally right. But the world isn't ideal, the best official response can be found here. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Dec 27 '15 at 15:35

This really needs to happen. Probably once a day I realize that my reason for voting to close a question was wrong, or at least not the best reason, but there is no way to fix my error.

There should be a window of time during which I can modify my reason and/or retract my vote while retaining the option to vote to close again, just like the way voting up and down works. As it is, if I pick a bad reason or if the question changes after I voted to close, my only options are leave it as-is, with an incorrect reason, or retract my close vote entirely even if I still think the question should be closed.

Obviously, if the question is already closed, the vote should be finalized/locked, and I should have to vote to reopen. But until then, I should be able to change my reason, at least one time.

| improve this answer | |

You must log in to answer this question.

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