16

One thing is certain: without an attendant increase in the close vote review limit, this would only result in the close review queue length increasing. Putting questions on hold is not a panacea for the quality of questions on this site, though it is a step in the right direction. We can also vote them down, and encourage good Q&A with upvotes and ...


13

As the alleged Serial Close-voter, I will state this: The user in question has a history of posting astonishingly lazy, zero-research questions and asking (and perhaps shading into expecting) us to do their work for them. It was believed by some that I was blindly dropping close votes on all of that user's questions, which is not the case. In fact, those ...


11

You should still vote to close. Other people's votes are not your responsibility. All you can do is vote correctly. Certainly, disagreeing with a close vote isn't a valid reason to flag, for example.


11

I pretty much gave up closing and close-vote reviewing during the recent Monica fiasco. Although I totally agree that closing bad questions is the right thing to do, and although I think I can safely say I've done my share of closing and reviewing, I gave up reviewing for two main reasons: It shouldn't be the moderators job to do the bulk of the closing ...


10

Oh, please do not reset it to 5 while reviewing anything. This change has been such a massive improvement that going back to 5 even briefly would just bring back all the old pain. Questions are actually starting to get closed and reopened again in more reasonable timeframes, though with all the high reputation people who have left that may not be saying a ...


10

You can flag it for moderator attention. A moderator can then deal with the bounty and close the question.


10

(cough noob cough) Oh, that jerk... yeah, he sucks. But, at the same time, 50 close votes a day... use 'em or lose 'em. If they age out, they can be re-cast, so worst case, "losing" a close vote to aging is really no different than losing it to not spending before the end of the UTC day. And to be fair, with over 800 open questions with the string "...


9

Currently, three Leave Open votes take a question out of the close queue and begin the aging of the existing close votes, if it had not already begun by the question receiving 100 views. When aging begins, close votes expire four days later. This question received its three Leave Open votes and will remain open unless two other people go far out of their ...


9

I've set the limit at 50 per day, making Server Fault consistent with other large sites on the network.


8

Bumping this. Given recent events it's possible we need this now more than ever. I've burned through 20 in an hour today alone, and our close queue is steadily increasing. I'm in favor of an immediate increase in close votes, and also a tiered approach based on how close votes are being used. 500 is a lot of closed votes, If we get bumped up to 50 close ...


8

If the only reason for closing the question is "Because it was asked by $USER", this is a bad thing. I certainly hope nobody is going through a user's profile putting close votes on all their questions just because they were asked by that particular user - that would be grounds for a "review queue time-out". On the flip side, if the questions do not meet ...


8

There's a difference between "I don't know what happened but a reboot fixed it" and "A reboot is needed because reasons". The later is useful, for those unaware that a reboot is necessary. Consider upgrading some drivers in Windows "Why my device doesn't work as I expected?", which is an expected issue if you didn't restart the system. Basically, it wasn't a ...


7

Are there things other than 3-vote close impacting your interest in reviewing? The UI changes that increase the number of clicks required to do common tasks certainly hasn't increased my motivation levels to wade through the review queues.


6

I'm not against this change, but I don't know whether it'll do very much. I keep on top of the close votes review queue, to keep it under control, and it's pretty rare that I hit a question that has 3 or 4 close votes already; typically I'm diamond-smashing things that only have one, or maybe two, close votes (or often even just a flag). I obviously can't ...


6

Some of you may have noticed the Meta Stack Exchange post - Testing three-vote close and reopen on 13 network sites (it's linked in the featured on meta sidebar) - we've finally got this project under way and Server Fault is one of the sites we'll be running the test on. Starting tomorrow, I'll be changing the site setting and closing and reopening will ...


6

It definitely helped, yes! Items spend less time in the queue and they are processed before they age out... It would be interesting to see the number of items that aged out of the queue before vs now.


6

Nope! The SE robot does a few things with these. Questions with no upvoted answers are bumped to the front page in pairs at random. I believe two questions are picked every four hours. This is intended, in case anyone happens to have an answer. I believe there is a cleanup process that deletes these after a time if the question also has a non-positive ...


6

First off, note that the limit automatically increases if the backlog gets really big. It's more or less permanently 40/day on Stack Overflow simply because thousands get added every day. But 20 reviews per day, every day, is a lot of reviews. Very few people have that kind of stamina. Yes, it's tempting to sit down and do 40, 50, 500/day when you're ...


5

I voted to leave the question open when I saw it in the queue, because I thought it was reasonable for various reasons that boil down to what you said at the beginning. It is, of course, subject area which I'm not familiar with really at all. That said, I don't think the process is broken on the whole. Certainly it's possible for five people voting the ...


5

There's no UI provided to us Moderators now have the capability to rearrange the close reasons. But we can't edit them; to change one, it has to be deactivated and a completely new one activated. Personally I think that the most frequently used reasons should be listed near the top. And I have taken the opportunity, when installing a new close reason, to ...


5

I Agree to Everyone, 3 is a nice number which does do its job. It's DEFINITELY helping, yes. Did this help? -YES, Definitely Did it Hurt? -Only those, that are Spamming this Site with Off topic - So IMHO No ;-) Did it make you more interested in close/reopen reviewing? Less? -I agree that, it will be more interested than it would be on Five. To be ...


5

From this moderator's point of view the change has been beneficial. Flag-volume is mostly not an answer issues, and is leaving the questions alone for the most part. Once in a while I'll see one requesting a migration to someplace not on our list. The number of low quality on questions has gone down. Given our volumes the 3 vote limit is much more likely to ...


4

Thanks everyone for the feedback ! As the feedback is nuanced in the answers provided; not a No, but more like a shy Yes, but the suggestion is kinda up-voted much. I asked a CM and it's a change that can be reverted easily if it's not positive, to quote Catija on my question; We start every site with a test for 30 days. After that, we assess the ...


4

If you really want to close something in the queue, you can click through to the Question and close it there. I know this isn't a good answer, since it's a pain, but it's what I plan on doing when I get to 12345 reviews. I kinda - but not too much - object to people getting more reviews, they should have to get up to 10,000+ the old-fashioned, 20-at-a-time ...


3

One of the reviewers who voted to close has often seemed (to me) to be something of a robo-reviewer, so I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for an explanation from them. It has a couple of "leave open" votes, but I've been clear on what those do. Since a mod is looking at this meta question, maybe it could just be hammered open? request a mandatory ...


3

Subsequent to my posting this Meta question, the question I referenced in my post has been put on hold. I therefore conclude it was correct to initiate action to close this question. Based on the following comment on the question, it appears a custom-close reason was used: I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because a reboot solved the problem. ...


2

My impressions as a new user here: Many questions are RTFM-questions. People claim to have read the manual, yet the manual clearly answers their questions. Lack of research or understanding. People may be good programmers, but that doesn't help them solve networking problems. Most questions are by new users with minimal history. This leads to a few ...


2

I agree with Ward, the community should be doing more of this but the fundamental problem has always been there aren't enough people voting to close. I could be wrong about this but there seems to be more off-topic questions lately. For example this person: https://serverfault.com/users/469795/bliako Asked three off-topic questions for essentially ...


2

Per the link meta.so Journeyman Geek mentioned, the easiest way to get these removed is to vote the question below 0. It'll get reaped within a week. No need to vote-to-close them and wait for a consensus. You can do it yourself through the power of the mere vote-button. Of course, this doesn't apply to questions-with-answers. Who knows, maybe that answer ...


1

Apparently this was silently (I can't find any announcement) changed sometime around March 2014. Related mSE question complaining about the same (and "Very Low Quality" has disappeared in the Flag menu for upvoted posts): Tell me why a close or flag option has been disabled!


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