Timeline for How active should moderators be in opening/closing questions?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:41 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Aug 15, 2014 at 1:43 | comment | added | Jamal Mod | Perhaps I was a little too hasty with closing the question, but I did also leave a comment for the OP in particular. I am surprised that you didn't leave a comment, even to tell me (indirectly) that my judgement was wrong and it should've stayed open. I mostly followed nhgrif's hesitancy about keeping it open, but I also personally felt that it wasn't much code to review (which, then again, is kinda stupid since I don't even know Objective-C). On the other hand, I don't know what an ideal architecture question looks like, so I just look for keywords like this to help decide. | |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 1:38 | comment | added | nhgrif | A complex reason for re-opening a question is actually MORE reason for you to post some sort of comment or open a meta discussion about it. If leaving this question open is correct, then Jamal was wrong in closing it, and I was wrong in supporting it, but if you don't show us why leaving it open is right, we will continue to make the misjudgment in the future and questions will continue to be misclosed in the future when it would be better to not be closed in the first place. | |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 1:35 | comment | added | nhgrif | But when one moderator overrules another moderator, can we at least open a meta discussion and say "I just re-opened this question closed by this other moderator. Here is why I feel it should be open." and let the community have a discussion? For the record, with the question Jamal closed, I have no strong feelings, and I'm perfectly fine with it being open. It's probably the right call. The concerning part to me isn't that it's open--it's that you've overruled another mod without comment or explanation. | |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 1:34 | comment | added | nhgrif | When one moderator closes a question and another moderator reopens the same question with essentially no edits to the question, then there is disagreement among the moderators. That's fine, that's going to happen, but they need to try to be on the same page. I feel that any time this happens, automatic protocol should include opening a meta discussion on the question. I'm also fine with erring on the side of leaving it open while it's being discussed. | |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 1:34 | comment | added | nhgrif | Ultimately, I think this answer misses my main concern. I'm okay with a moderator coming in and overruling a decision that a previous moderator or community vote made, but given that a decision was already made and you're overruling that decision and doing it without comment. | |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 1:31 | history | edited | 200_successMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Correction by @nhgrif
|
| Aug 15, 2014 at 0:49 | history | answered | 200_successMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |