Timeline for valid questions being closed.
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2017 at 7:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 5, 2012 at 4:35 | comment | added | gnat | @PresleyDias as you can see - yes, even accepted answers | |
| Apr 5, 2012 at 4:22 | comment | added | PresleyDias | @gnat ok, but even accepted answers? | |
| Apr 4, 2012 at 11:59 | comment | added | gnat | @PresleyDias Heavily downvoted answers are styled such that they're less notable | |
| Mar 17, 2012 at 10:42 | comment | added | PresleyDias | y is the color if this answer different from the rest? | |
| Sep 21, 2010 at 3:58 | comment | added | killown | I think the downvotes was a disagreement since your answer is correct. | |
| Sep 21, 2010 at 3:12 | vote | accept | killown | ||
| Sep 21, 2010 at 2:54 | comment | added | Tamara Wijsman | @Mark Trapp: No. I was one of those that has done that by accident and I'm pretty sure there were others. From a community perspective it has happened by accident, that's why the community has chosen to re-open it. The "fun" comment of a third-party user triggered the accident to mis-interpret the rules for the question and answers itself... The diamond user would solely be needed for the edit war, as that's something we can't stop as we don't have the ability to lock a question from further edits. I'm not at all supporting the bad idea you mentioned... | |
| Sep 21, 2010 at 2:46 | history | undeleted | Tamara Wijsman | ||
| Sep 21, 2010 at 2:41 | history | deleted | Tamara Wijsman | ||
| Sep 21, 2010 at 2:40 | comment | added | killown | @TomWj thanks for understand me | |
| Sep 21, 2010 at 1:46 | comment | added | user8 | And by suggesting that all close votes that either get overridden or do not gain support are "accidental" and if the question wasn't re-opened a diamond moderator would be needed, you only support the idea that we need arbitrators to come in and really manage the site rather than letting the community decide. | |
| Sep 21, 2010 at 1:44 | comment | added | user8 | To say Why are so many programmers arrogant? was closed by accident is absurd: 5 people didn't accidentally click the close button and provide a reason as to why they think it should be closed. 5 people thought it was a question that should be closed, and 5 more thought it was a question that should be re-opened. If 5 more people disagree with the re-open, it'll be closed again. It's a disagreement based on an interpretation of the rules for the site, not 5 people screwing up. | |
| Sep 21, 2010 at 1:35 | history | answered | Tamara Wijsman | CC BY-SA 2.5 |