-3
\$\begingroup\$

This is about my this question which was initiated by @Ruut user and is now closed as "too broad".

On my opinion, I gave so many details, that a closing vote as "too broad" was simply nonsense.

From @Ruut user I've experienced earlier a generally negative attitude, too. He could have ask for clarification, or could answer any possibility if there is one. He didn't do it, he only clicked to VtC.

I suspect, the real reason of the close vote was that this site, compared to others, somehow really doesn't like new people here. But, of course, I don't have any evidence about his motives, although it is to me clear and obvious.

A realistic possibility is to delete my account, but it didn't solve the problem, it only avoided it.

Of course I try to save my question, ask for advices, etc, but I don't think it would be successful. Reopen votes have a very small chance to a positive result, especially if we compare this to the success rate of the close votes.

The second thing what I do is that I try to clear the situation here on the meta, although I have a bad foresight that probably also this question won't survive too long.

Of course, if you have any advices to help this question to survive, I am open for them, even if it would be a major edit.

So, what other could I do out of these?

\$\endgroup\$
13
\$\begingroup\$

I've undeleted this because I want to explain. (You may also want to take the tour before continuing to read this, as it covers some important basic concepts for how the site works, and I notice you haven't seen it yet.)

We close things here. It's an integral part of the process of maintaining the site's focus on practical, answerable, non-debate, non-discussion, problem-solving via questions and answers.

We also reopen things here. The voters can vote things open or closed, and the whole point of the system is to crowdsource a final judgement by leveraging individual judgements into a decision: open or closed? As you've seen, there is no need to panic when a question is closed, because it can just as easily reopen.

That's why there's no misuse of power involved here: someone might be mistaken in their close vote, but that will easily be corrected by other voters reopening. Essentially, there can't be meaningful abuse of power because there isn't much power involved in the first place — one person's vote can easily be undone by another's.

Now, what's the point of closing? There is a lot to say about why questions get closed, enough to fill a FAQ about it, but the short version is that questions get closed when enough voters think that there's something about the question that will prevent it from being answered properly. And you do want good answers, right? It may not feel like it, but closing a question is an important favour we do for the person asking the question. It's a “pause” that gives the asker, and the community, time to focus on identifying and correcting any issues with how the question is written (is it unclear? is it accidentally asking too much in one question? is it asking for a type of answer we don't provide here?). This process makes sure that everyone understands the question, which is vital as a starting point to ensure that answers will be constructive, on-topic, complete, and helpful.

As a new user, having a question put on hold for any reason can be a bit of a shock. It feels hostile. But it isn't done from hostility. It's a necessary site feature to deliver on our site's promise of quality, focused problem-solving.

However, that process, and its results, are not everyone's cup of tea. That is OK, and we are OK with people deciding they don't like how the site works and going to find their help elsewhere. That's also an important reason we have closures and other things that might not suit a new user — we don't want to have anyone here who doesn't want to do things the way our site does things.

So relax, trust that the system works, and that nobody is being mean. It normally takes votes from five regular users to close a question, not just one (such as Ruut), and they're just doing what they think is best for your question and the site; it is nothing personal.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ extremely well put \$\endgroup\$ – Wibbs Sep 19 '15 at 18:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ One minor quibble: it doesn't always take 5 votes to close. Mods can obviously close single-handed, but so can gold-tag users thanks to Mjolnir. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Sep 19 '15 at 18:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ It's true. But those are as easily undone as a close that took five people, and a gold-tag close can only be done for duplicates. And if it's a mod close, we can take the heat. ;) \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Sep 19 '15 at 18:50
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I amended it to say "normally" and "regular users" for accuracy, but left out discussing the exceptions of gold/mod votes because they're exceptions and a detail that's tangential to the "this is working correctly" explanation of the crowdsourced votes that brought this on. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Sep 19 '15 at 18:56

You must log in to answer this question.

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