As the Mechanical snail points out, this has now been implemented, though not quite as-requested.
Only accessible from the review queue (so rather difficult to target a specific question). Yes, this is very much by-design.
Voting against closing does not override anyone's close vote. However, a sufficient number of "Do Not Close" responses (...
We just rolled out a change to how questions are automatically added to the reopen queue. Previously, if the author edited a closed post within 5 days of it being closed, that would trigger it to be added to the queue. This was a great way to get additional views for questions that might've been improved enough to be re-opened, but it didn't do much for ...
This would be a good ability to add here.
The removal of the reopen vote should act like removing a close vote: you can remove it only once and cannot be used on said post again. Instead of the pop-up saying that are you sure that you want to reopen the question, the pop-up should say:
Are you sure you want to retract your reopen vote (the reopen vote ...
This idea has an immediate appeal to those of us who appreciate symmetry. However, I strongly suspect this would be an extremely impractical flag to add...
See, closing and re-opening aren't exactly equal. Most notably, closing requires you to specify a reason - reopening does not. This cuts both ways: closing requires more effort, but other voters also ...
I'm not sure why it's displayed in the order that it is, but I actually cast the second re-open vote on that question, so what you're seeing is in fact an artifact of the re-openers not being displayed in the order that they voted.
I'm not entirely sure if that's by design, however there's no sort of privilege escalation at play here.
This does ...
We already have the mechanisms for this, and they work.
If a user doesn't have enough reputation to make a direct edit to a post, they can suggest an edit, as you have done.
Other users will review it. If it is approved, it will go into the reopen queue, where, if the question now has enough merit it will get reopened.
Now, in this particular case, when ...
In general, changing the close reason is a lot of work as you need 5 people to reopen and then 5 people to reclose it, and the 5 people to reclose it can't be any of the people who closed it previously, so you should leave it alone unless it is really necessary.
However mods can do this on their own because of their binding vote, so it is preferable to have ...
I think this is a great idea. I am a little worried about the number of notifications I would get as an active close voter on SO. With the dozen questions I have helped closing, this could result in an enormous amount of notifications every day.
Why not make some sort of dashboard, like the current tools dashboard for 10k users? It isn't annoying yet very ...
It is already "possible" to do this!
Go to the new Review interface for close votes.
Click through the ≈ 60,100 questions (on SO) with close votes until you see the one you want to vote not to close.
Click Do Not Close.
The functionality already exists, but is hard to use. If ...
Bad closures happen, there's no denying that. But good closures also happen, and we don't award close voters with reputation when they get it right. Penalizing them when they get it wrong would be extreme (and it feels a bit vindictive).
Just vote to re-open and move on.
Your example shows a question being closed as a duplicate of another that appears to cover the same general question. Then your question was edited to clarify the differences. Then it was reopened.
This is exactly how the system is intended to work.
A lot of folks who complain have a real problem with the whole "edit to clarify the differences" step. You ...
If we really wanted to make reopening questions viable, we could add them to /review.
Imagine a /review pane dedicated to questions that were closed, but subsequently edited. Aggregating them and distinguishing between "closed and forgotten" and "trying to improve" would make a huge difference in their chances of being reopened. Given the "trying to ...
There's a "leave closed" button in the queue. If a certain number (currently 3) users click it for a given question, it'll drop out of the queue.
Without this, questions would remain in the queue indefinitely until they either got re-opened or deleted. The purpose of the queue is to give questions some additional exposure, on the off-chance that they ...
The current implementation for rescinding close votes doesn't allow people to cast them again. This is deliberate in order to prevent a few kinds of potential abuse. Any implementation of rescinding reopen votes would likely match that, which would make it unsuitable for balancing out accidental reopen clicks. We want people to be sure when casting these ...
This is how questions are automatically added to the reopen queue:
we decided to take... into account, things that might indicate a closed question that could use some additional review. Currently, this means that a closed question will automatically be added to the reopen queue when it is...
...Edited (body edits only) within 5 days of closure by ...
Why not? Those are different actions.
You can also:
Vote to close a question and upvote it.
Vote to delete an answer and upvote it.
Vote to reopen a question and downvote it.
...and many more things that won't make much sense.
The only action that "override" a previous one is up/down voting.
Ok, this is fixed - all comment flags will be henceforth ignored for the purpose of this check, along with any "in need of moderator intervention" flags raised on the post itself (that exception already existed).
Thanks for pointing this out; by my estimation this was probably responsible for around 700 invalidated reopen reviews on Stack Overflow alone, ...
This question is not a good fit to our Q&A format. We expect answers to generally involve facts, references, or specific expertise; this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion.
Until this changes, the answer is yes.
Reopening is hard. It requires thinking, which is also hard. Fortunately, I have done some of the hard thinking for you, and made a handy flow-chart for your benefit:
Should I re-open a closed question?
Note that this also doubles as a handy Stack Exchange drinking game.
It appears this has been broken for over two years now...
Background: reopen review triggers
There are three ways a question can end up in Reopen Review:
A reopen vote is cast when there are no other active reopen votes on the question. Note that this allows for a single question to be enqueued multiple times, provided all votes age away before another ...
Bullet the blue sky
First, some data:
There are just over 3K questions that require more than the usual 3 votes to be deleted
There are just under 1.5K questions that require at least 5 votes to be deleted
There are 170+ questions that need at least 20 votes to be deleted
There are 36K questions that should be considered for deletion (closed, not ...
The review in question: https://stackoverflow.com/review/reopen/2104282
When you go to the Reopen Votes queue, there are a few options to choose from:
Edit and Reopen
You have chosen "Edit and Reopen", and that's the warning you get before it casts a reopen vote.
To just edit the post without casting a vote, click on "link" to ...
Both of those questions are too broad.
Remember that Stack Overflow's standards have changed over the years. In 2010, that sort of question was more acceptable. Now, they are definitely not. These are canonical examples of "too broad" questions.
Edit: To address the second question, I'd like to point out that the list the answerer provided is not actually ...
That is only part of the effect of the Leave Closed button. It will kick the question out of review if enough people click it, but it will also start the aging process of the existing reopen votes immediately if the review is completed as Leave Closed.
Skip does absolutely nothing. It just moves onto the next review item and prevents that one from appearing ...
No I don't think they should.
If your question is closed then the correct course of action if you want it reopened is to edit the question to make it acceptable to the relevant community, not to accept one of the answers.
Given that the same person asks a question and accepts an answer, the fact that an answer is accepted doesn't legitimise a question.