246

Update: this is now enabled everywhere! The rules are: You can instantly close as a duplicate any question that was originally asked with a tag you have a gold badge for. You can instantly reopen any question closed as a duplicate that was originally asked with a tag you have a gold badge for. You can only close or reopen a given question once (this hasn't ...


95

I have a few thoughts on this... First, if we're gonna do this then let's make it worthwhile: 1 vote == closed, regardless of how many other votes or flags are in play. My biggest beef with close voting is the execution-squad attitude it seems to inspire among folks: "oh, I don't want to take responsibility for closing a question, I just want to be one of ...


86

We've no plans to make "opting out" an option. This is in keeping with existing behavior: once you gain the ability to vote to close, you can no longer flag for closing. The system trusts you more, and there's no way to tell it to trust you less*. To be perfectly frank, I've never liked the attitude toward closing that turning it into a voting system ...


81

Yes! Yes! Yes! This is an excellent power tool for us as gold tag badge holders. It makes our job of closing questions as duplicates much easier. I have personally often had questions which I closed as duplicate of another question and someone else came with a much better duplicate. I wished I could reopen and close again, but that wasn't possible of ...


58

We have made two changes to closure by users that own a gold badge: First, we now look at the question's current tags instead of its original tags, unless you were the one that edited them (either by doing it yourself, or by approving an edit from someone else). This is done to address the request made in: Only prohibit those who edited the tags from ...


48

This is an extreme abuse of two different systems: closing and editing. Folks who engage in such behavior risk having their accounts suspended or worse. Thank you for reporting this; the user involved has been warned.


46

This is soooo nice! The most important sub-feature about this feature is the ability to finally add additional similar threads to the duplicate question. This does not necessarily need to be the exact duplicate, but there are often 2-3 more very closely related topics already been asked. Previously, as a site-moderator, I often used strategic close-voting ...


38

If the button says "Vote To Close" when you have super powers, the text is actively misleading. The action is not a vote action, it is a close action. The button should say "Close". That is, I think UX considerations suggest the button should not have its current label. Shog9, in his answer, says he does not want the two modes distinguished, as voters ...


32

Flag for moderator attention, misusing this powerful ability is rather damaging and the moderators will put a stop to it. I'll add that the moderators have no way to only remove this specific ability, a user that continues to misuse this privilege after being warned is likely to get their account suspended.


32

When I first got the privilege of unilateral closes as a mod of a tiny site, I had the same first reaction. But I've come to appreciate that unilateral actions can head off a lot of pain later. I was able to monitor comment threads and meta posts until I became convinced that the conversation no longer constructive. My unilateral decisions were subject to ...


30

We're keeping this intentionally minimalistic starting out: let's face it, this the biggest change we've made to the actual criteria for closing in a good long while, so it's worth taking some time to see how it's actually used. At minimum, we'll be adding a note to the documentation noting the attachment of a new ability. I believe this is only the third ...


27

I think this ends up placing a slightly arcane restriction on how sites can use tags, and gives an inordinate amount of influence to a small group of users who may not necessarily be reliably trusted with moderation. It changes the balance of a site significantly by linking two previously entirely unlinked systems. Consider Meta for a moment. (I know it's ...


25

We originally thought this would be necessary too. Then we looked at the distribution of gold badges. I think you can probably stand to moderate one person if he decides to go rogue on his own area of expertise. As soon as there are two people, you have a balance - one can revert the other's actions. Three people and you're back to moderating situations ...


23

I noticed this too. Beyond the fact that it took me a minute or two to realise that the explanatory description is now on-click rather than on-hover, which is mostly my own fault and I can get over, my one note-worthy issue with the change is that it changes what it means to click on a tag. That is, whereas everywhere else on the site (AFAIK?) clicking on a ...


20

For non-gold/diamond users, could you provide a way to submit multiple duplicates as a close reason? For instance, I wrote a comment here, but I'm afraid that the comment gets deleted when the review is done, leaving only one duplicate link on the post, unless a gold/diamond notices.


19

I was curious as to how many gold badges there were in various tags on Stack Overflow (the site with the most gold badge holders according to another answer), so I (semi-manually) scraped https://stackoverflow.com/help/badges?tab=tags&filter=gold and sorted it by decreasing number of gold badges (excluding tags with fewer than 5 gold badges): ...


19

If someone else has a gold tag badge that works for that question, they can always override your duplicate decision with the click of a button, whether you also had the badge or not and regardless of your status as a moderator. That's what they're trusted to do - single-handedly close and/or reopen a question using that tag. However, as a moderator, you do ...


18

If you want to show your gold tag badge, do it next to the diamond (as per Mat's Mug's suggestion), not instead of it, as in the initial request. That will actually add to the dialog that the user is an expert on the subject too, but won't hide his powers. For completeness: I disagree with the initial request to hide the diamond. The diamond comes with ...


18

Anyone who can close a question with one vote can also re-open it with one vote. Post a comment addressing them by name and explaining why you believe your question is different: (e.g. "Hi, @ExpHP - that other question is about overlaying multiple charts, but mine concerns using both alpha and a colormap to represent different information channels; please ...


17

After a long time study of how StackOverflow in general behaves on this subject, I think we should actually extend the possibilities for closing questions as off topic for gold and possibly silver badge holders. I do have currently a gold badge for cryptography & encryption but I can see this has limited effect on the site as most of the questions that ...


17

If you have multiple gold badges in common with the question's tags, it chooses one. Here, I have both the sass and css badge, but it chose the css tag for the closure. Not sure if it goes by the order the tags appear in or the age of the badge when deciding (I got the css badge first).


17

This is really awesome, I don't have to coordinate multiple people's duplicate votes to close against multiple questions! but can we clean up all that unused whitespace? It looks really ugly and unnatural: compared to this:


17

One of the problems here is that some of the FAQs have gotten... Really long. Like this one: The Complete Rate-Limiting Guide ...or, hell, this monstrosity: What are the badges I can earn on each site, and what are the exact criteria for earning each badge? When you need nine answers to cover a topic, it's not really an FAQ anymore, eh? The original Stack ...


16

The previous question that I know was asked about this exact topic must have been deleted, so I will paraphrase my comment to that question here (and expand on it).... Ultimately, meta sites are unique. They have required tags, which no main site (to the best of my knowledge) has. This gives a unique opportunity for heavy participants to earn tag badges on ...


15

No. The number of tags you have dupehammer for is irrelevant. It's just any tag will let you use the dupehammer. You are still limited to one successful close vote on a question in the lifetime of that question. You can never cast another close vote on the question, regardless of whether you have dupehammer privileges or not.


14

In my opinion, there's a big difference between fixing an incorrect closure and preventing a potential incorrect closure altogether. I'd prefer gold badge holders not clear close votes in the way you suggest. If it became a common practice, I'd advocate for limiting the unilateral actions to one per question. In other words, if someone used a dupehammer to ...


13

The reason I was able to get it implemented (a lot of thinking internally was that the idea was completely crazypants) is that you have to have a plausible duplicate in order to use it. Folks can't go around just closing everything they don't like. That's a measure of power that the community must trust you with quite deliberately, as in through you winning ...


12

I designed the feature around the abuse case of someone finding a question they don't particularly care for, throwing a tag on it where they have a gold badge, and marking it as a duplicate. It was the simplest path to implementation, and folks on our side were a bit nervous about how it would be used, even with those safeguards in place. That's why it has ...


12

Should I consider this an abuse of a privilege? It sure feels like it. Closing a question instantly after answering feels like using the system to prevent other answers (although my personal experience is that duplicate-closed questions don't attract that much votes any more). But of course, we can't be sure. And what should I, as a regular user on that ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible