Timeline for What can we do to fix the "Reasonable management practices" close reason?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 3, 2015 at 0:09 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @ShaneMadden Yes indeed it is! | |
| Feb 3, 2015 at 0:08 | comment | added | Shane Madden StaffMod | @MichaelHampton And, done - 4th custom reason slot should be available. | |
| Feb 2, 2015 at 23:52 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @MadHatter I will indeed continue thinking about them. For the moment I would just use the "too broad" close reason, since that's essentially what they are. | |
| Feb 2, 2015 at 23:31 | comment | added | Shane Madden StaffMod | Agreed on the new reason. I don't think I have the permissions to flip the "extra close reason" switch, but I'll ping the community team on it. | |
| Feb 2, 2015 at 7:47 | comment | added | MadHatter | +1 from me, Michael, but I urge you now to turn your thinking powers to the first category. I agree with you that consensus probably can't be reached on it, but I very much desire that the community should at least reach closure on the issue. The current model where the vocal minority continue to post low-knowledge questions while the rest of us desperately wish they'd go away isn't working very well, for me. I'd love ground to be given, but as is often the case with binary questions, I'm not sure it can be; a simple count of which half of the community is really bigger may have to serve. | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 22:26 | history | answered | Michael HamptonMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |