11
$\begingroup$

As most of you probably know, the reason displayed when a question is closed is the one who got the majority of votes, when it is the case that one reason was picked more than all the others.

In this question the above happened. When there were $4$ votes, $3$ were due to off-topicness while the other, which was mine, was due to the question already having an answer in another question.

The points of this question are:

  1. Report the bug, if it is one.
  2. Request that all the closing reasons appear, perhaps even indicating who chose what and the number of votes each reason got.
  3. Make it clear that I closed because it was a duplicate and not because I consider the question to be off-topic. As a part of this community I wish to make it clear where I stand in regards to the current debate about questions as the above being off-topic or not.
$\endgroup$
8
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The bullet item does imply that you were not among those voting off-topic. "Homework questions must..." – Andres Caicedo, Danny Cheuk, Zev Chonoles, Amzoti -- your name is not there. Maybe the first line should say "put on hold by"... without indication of reason, since the reason and users supporting that reason are listed below. $\endgroup$
    – 40 votes
    Commented Jul 13, 2013 at 19:13
  • $\begingroup$ @40votes Hadn't even noticed that. Thanks. $\endgroup$
    – Git Gud
    Commented Jul 13, 2013 at 19:15
  • $\begingroup$ Also, since this really is a feature-request more than a bug, it'll get more publicity on MSO: you could add your voice to Don't choose the best close reason, allow multiple close reasons. $\endgroup$
    – 40 votes
    Commented Jul 13, 2013 at 21:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You left a comment, linking to the duplicate. I think that makes your intentions clear. $\endgroup$
    – Gerry Myerson
    Commented Jul 14, 2013 at 1:09
  • $\begingroup$ @GerryMyerson Actually, I think that comment may have been automatically generated when Git voted to close as duplicate. But I am not sure. $\endgroup$
    – Willie Wong Mod
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 8:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @WillieWong It was. That doesn't change Gerry's point, though. Despite that and despite what 40 votes mentioned in his first comment, those things are hardly noticeable in view of the gigantic announcement that shows who closed and why. $\endgroup$
    – Git Gud
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 9:25
  • $\begingroup$ Only 5 votes are required to close a question. Only those 5 votes are deemed helpful, other votes are invalidated. There was a recent discussion about this on MSO: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188587/more-than-5-close-votes $\endgroup$
    – m0sa
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 14:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @mosa I'm not sure how that's relevant to what I mentioned. $\endgroup$
    – Git Gud
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 19:31

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

It seems to me that priority should be given to closing Questions as Duplicates rather than as "off-topic" qua Problem Statement Questions.

For one thing, a Duplicate is not supposed to be edited for re-opening, while such a thing is explicitly encouraged for so-called "off-topic" Questions lacking enough effort or context.

A recent instance illustrates the situation. While a majority of the votes were to close as "off-topic", in fact the real Question is on-topic and has already been answered, so it should never be re-opened.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Exactly, but that is more of a community-using-wrong-close-reasons/moderation issue. If you ever encounter such a case, mark it for moderator attention. A moderator has the power to reopen the question, possibly talk to the users who used the wrong close reason, and close it as a duplicate. $\endgroup$
    – m0sa
    Commented Nov 27, 2014 at 16:46
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, @mosa. Probably you saw the recent related Q on Meta.SE about the desirability of preserving an indication of proposed duplicates when closing for another reason wins a plurality of close-votes. $\endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Commented Nov 27, 2014 at 17:20
  • $\begingroup$ Unfortunately, on some sites, duplicates are often not really duplicates of the linked questions once you look in depth. IMHO, this kind of makes up for true duplicates not aimed for reopening. $\endgroup$
    – O. R. Mapper
    Commented Nov 6, 2018 at 11:37

You must log in to answer this question.

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