Based upon a recent answer1, 2 to a previous question of mine, I'd like to re-visit an older request.

Please give all close voters3 on Programmers 50 votes instead of the standard 244.


  1. All of the original reasons that were laid out before still hold.

  2. New users to the site end up with a poor impression regarding what is on-topic for the site when off-topic questions are not cleared out quickly. The more quickly we can patch up the broken windows, the more favorable Programmers and StackExchange appear to new visitors.

  3. The stats show that our active close voters regularly run out of votes and this is impacting their ability to help provide community moderation.

  4. The influx of low quality questions from {bans at SO | ignorance of SO} continues to increase.

  5. Items like the Structured Tag Cleanup Initiative put a strain on the community when they are trying to balance closing off incoming low quality questions as well as cleaning up old NPR-style low quality questions.

  6. This version of the request is much easier to implement as it's already part of the per-site configuration setting and doesn't require a code change.

  7. More close votes means being able to migrate questions more quickly. That in turn cuts down on extra work created for mods when they have to merge cross-posted questions.

1 Finally, if we were going to increase the limit, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to just raise it for 10k users. From a very practical standpoint, changing it for everyone is a site setting, but changing it for users over 10k would require a code change. For another, the setting has already been raised to 50 for 3k+ users on SO, Math, Super User, Ubuntu, and Server Fault without any particular problems. I'd suggest removing that portion of the feature request that needlessly confuses matters

2 Gratuitous footnotes are because I heard someone likes them

3 By "Close Voters", I mean anyone who has earned at least 3k rep on the site.

4 My assumption is that the number of allowed votes in the close review queue increases proportionately, but if not, I'll make a separate request.

  • 2
    Related MSE feature request: Give extra close votes, only accessible via /review
    – user40980
    Commented Aug 18, 2015 at 20:35
  • 1
  • @NormalHuman - Very cool and pertinent piece of information there. Thanks for providing the link.
    – user53019
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 0:43
  • @durron597 - Um, all I can say is ... "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" Nice find, but I'm still hoping we can have the easy site setting change while they work on a code change which would obviously take a while longer.
    – user53019
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 0:44
  • 1
    @GlenH7 if you scroll up you'll see that Shog's message is directly in response to NormalHuman posting a link to this question in the tavern.
    – durron597
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 1:14
  • 1
    A little bit of math, based on stats at the referenced post. 18 delete-worthy questions a day average potentially drain 90 votes to close, that's an amount that would leave 4 voters out of close votes. Since this is an average, let's account for possible spikes - multiply it by 2. To be able to accommodate just for delete-worthy questions, 8 (eight) users with close privileges would have to "carry a duty" of being here and using all their CVs every day. How much would that leave for questions that are worthy "only" of close, and not delete? How much would that leave for stci?
    – gnat
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 10:13
  • 1
    ...it would help to know stats showing how much CVs average are spent on deleted questions. It would also help to know more about "spikes" in getting delete worthy questions, my guesstimate of multiplying by 2 may be too pessimistic or too optimistic - there's no way to tell without stats
    – gnat
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 10:18
  • 3
    @gnat - The impression I got from Jon's comment is that a site setting was easy enough to change, which is why I focused this question on that aspect. In my opinion, doubling the number of close votes would be a good place to start even if detailed stats showed we needed more. In the link durron provided, there's hints of creating a scaling system based upon rep. I'll happily take the increased number of votes until that program can be implemented. September has already arrived for us.
    – user53019
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 12:03
  • I understand. My comment is mostly to ensure that discussion won't be skewed by misleading public stats, like it happened in prior request. Speaking of relevant stats, also worth keeping in mind that currently available estimate on how many close voters experience contention is also based on somewhat slippery stats
    – gnat
    Commented Aug 19, 2015 at 12:17


You must log in to answer this question.