Timeline for Where did the 'close' link go?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 2016 at 12:58 | comment | added | warren | @OldBunny2800 - except apparently that part of the FAQ isn't true :( | |
| Jan 31, 2016 at 17:50 | comment | added | AAM111 |
This, thanks @warren. Not allowing close votes is bad as it goes against the faq: We don't run Area 51. The community does.
|
|
| Jun 14, 2014 at 18:19 | comment | added | e-sushi | @JohnB Why do I feel this itch to create that “underwater juggling” proposal? ;) | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 19:06 | comment | added | warren | @JohnB - my perspective is simple: by seeing what has been linked in VtC (ie previous proposals and/or active sites), it becomes more obvious to proposers (most of whom seem to be pretty recent to the SE world) that what they want either already exists, or can be better served by joining something else in process | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 18:21 | comment | added | JohnB | I'm with you there, I prefer transparency. Tangentially related: it is exceedingly frustrating when proposals get deleted without notice and I scratch my head thinking "I swear this proposal on underwater juggling existed, am I going crazy?". I think it's important for question close votes to be transparent on regular SE sites, but I consider proposal close votes on A51 to be rather low priority for needing transparency. I don't think I've ever checked (or cared) to see who voted, but perhaps you have a different perspective on that | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 18:13 | comment | added | warren | @JohnB - not wanting transparency seems dangerous. I know Area51 is a private company, but the community is based on transparency. | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 18:11 | comment | added | JohnB | I think moderator intervention is a good thing for A51, and certainly not ridiculous. I have seen lots of close votes that make me wonder what the heck the voter was thinking. There was a lot of "I'm guessing this is probably a duplicate, might as well mark it as such" followed by what I think was bandwagon voting. I've never had any close voting powers on Discuss.A51 or for proposals, but I still flag things that I think require moderator attention. I'm not sure why there is a need for transparency for this though. | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 17:57 | comment | added | warren | @JohnB - flagging requires moderator intervention. VtC requires community participation AND maintains transparency | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 17:56 | comment | added | JohnB | The difference is not immediately clear to me, could you elaborate? | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 17:54 | comment | added | warren | @JohnB - by flagging a post? That's ridiculous. | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 15:44 | comment | added | JohnB | What opportunity is lost? You can still contribute, as Robert pointed out | |
| Apr 18, 2014 at 14:02 | history | answered | warren | CC BY-SA 3.0 |