Sometimes when going through questions, I can see that someone has previously voted to close it.    However quite often I disagree with the close vote and I would like to vote for the question to stay open instead. However I can't do that.  Maybe adding it as an option to this popup:    But make it only show up when not doing a review task since the review tasks have their own way to vote to keep a question open.
18005
My request is simple: Many times, there will be a question where some people feel like it should be closed. At the same time, I'll feel like it's a perfectly legit question, and it should therefore NOT be closed. Right now, I have to wait till it gets enough close votes (which it always does for some reason, as soon as 1 or 2 people vote to close, e/o else decides to vote as well) and then vote to re-open. How about, as soon as there's one vote to close, there should be an option to counter the close vote, something like "vote not to close" or whatever. This would then bring the "Vote to close" number down by one. Only when the vote to close outnumbers the vote not to close by 5, that's when a question is indeed closed. Any thoughts?
93731
I just got  for close votes. But it says me that the question is already on hold.         I realized that this it an audit. And I clicked on Close. Hurrah! I passed an audit without any efforts!        Can we fix this? Please.  Note: We may say that this it a duplicate to this question: . But that question is for First Posts while this question is for Close vote.
15747
I downvoted  and now really can't say why, so I wanted to remove my downvote. However, I get the message:  You last voted on this question yesterday Your vote is now locked in unless this question is edited  Why is this? I don't think I voted on it multiple times, and even when I did, I can change my mind, can't I?
55941
I have question  I am sure this is valid question - I am not new on SO. It was closed no comments on the question. Given that the SO is here for a while - there are lot more users who can close questions (lot more than it was a year ago). Some users might not even understand the question but have power to close it. I think to prevent blatant actions - SO should implement a mandatory comment post if a user votes to close a question.
53271
If I (as a user with vote-to-close privileges) click &quot;flag&quot; on a question, I see the ability to flag as &quot;does not belong here, or is a duplicate&quot;.  Is this a ? I'm quite sure I didn't used to be able to see that.   Anyway, if I use that (&quot;does not belong here, or is a duplicate&quot;) option and VtC the question, take a sip of my tea and continue about my daily business, upon submitting the &quot;flag&quot;, the counter for the &quot;flag&quot; button gets set, not the &quot;close&quot; button.   This would seem like a definite .
14047
When my vote to close my own question as duplicate was registered as a simple vote, I was a bit surprised, as I thought it'd immediately close for my own given reason, but the question of whether a user should be allowed to force a close-as-duplicate has already been addressed here on Meta.  However, when I later reloaded the page it was much worse:     I automatically leave a comment asking myself if something answers my question. Well, of course I think it does, otherwise I wouldn't have voted for that. "The system" picks up my on question and asks it to me again. Well darn, I just told you that it does — take my vote for an answer!   This can't be right!
71470
Does a feature like this exist? A question has been closed, because the user must write it in a better way. I have already an answer for it, and it would be great to have an alert/notification when it will be open again.
6290
Having just  from any of the queues, it was reviewing close votes; however, this audit was flawed in that I didn't even cast a close vote.  Often I press the Close button to preview greater detail and sentiment of the closure, spawning the Why should this question be closed dialog box:    Especially for duplicates, where functionality is solely dependent on spawning this dialog.  From Closing > Duplicate, I can search or view selected duplicates:    Although, I realize general closure reasons are summarized on the page:    This question had 6-upvotes, but seemed very localized referencing subjective query is "taking too long" and even had a sqlfiddle link.  Maybe overly broad regarding performance tuning, the OP was posting like a forum with two answer posts to his own question  and  with one of those answers asking follow-up questions.    Wanting to gauge community response, current closure totals struck my curiosity.  So, I pressed the Close button and boom - oh, the humanity!  I failed, and didn't even cast a close vote.    Votes are not cast until a reason for closure is selected and Vote to Close is pressed.  Taking any review very seriously on this site, it only seems fair that my review quality is tested through actionable steps instead of clicking for more detailed information, leveraging the functional design of the close vote user interface.  Sure, it's complex to seed fake vote totals, and then there's controversy of mindless voting in the majority or people who simply cherry pick 4-vote questions.  Still though, it seems unfair I should hesitate to review further information of vote totals and duplicates before skipping due to the implementation of this audit.
6486
I've just been offered the wonderful opportunity to review .        ... but on closer inspection ?        Is this  (e.g I'm assuming this post did previous have a close vote, but has now aged away in ways I don't understand), or should questions with no active close votes be removed from the queue.  p.s. If it's , please expect my  asking for this not to be the case ;).
58939
Since "" we now have the possibility to retract close votes.   However, as mentioned in "" there is no indication when looking at a question to see if I have already cast such a close vote.  Therefore, could we have a UI improvement to show this? Adding some image with freehand circles to improve visibility.
78462
I think moderators should have the ability to cast a normal, non binding close and open vote like they were a normal user (while of course retaining their ability to cast a binding vote where necessary). This can be used in &quot;grey areas&quot; where a moderator can choose to give his or her opinion, but not make a decision alone; a good example of this is . This also helps in areas not so grey (questions that everyone would agree should be closed) since the OP has the time to see close (1) and possibly edit his or her question. The moderator can then optionally come back after a few minutes and close it for real if it's not improved (or maybe during that time other 4 people voted to close it). This would also fit perfectly in :  Since we’re about to add community moderators on both Stack Overflow and Server Fault, I need to document what it is, exactly, we expect moderators to do. The short answer is, as little as possible!
91870
My question is similar to   I believe this would be useful in the scenario if I upvote a question or answer... and the OP changes it where you no longer think it deserves the up vote you have bestowed upon it.  For example, I upvoted an answer, because I thought it was a great answer... then the OP changes it to add a bunch of stuff that I no longer think makes it a great answer. How am I notified of this change?  I know you can rollback use roll back, but how do you know it was edited without getting a notification!?  I haven't seen any meta asking this question, but if one exists please link it and I will remove this question!    EDIT:   @JoshC brings up a valid point... where not everyone has time to go through all the notifications... but why can their be an option under account preferences to turn this feature on or off?
39886
TL;DR: Grant 500+ rep users (except the OP) the privilege to flag a question for reopening. Currently, you can flag a question for closing, and it automatically enters the  review queue, where 3K+ users can vote to close (or to leave open) the question.  However, there is no ability to flag a closed question for reopening. A &lt;3K user must either:  Flag for diamond moderator attention, causing more workload for the moderators. Create a meta-post on the question, requesting for the question to be reopened. ...  Feature Request Add the ability to flag a post for reopening, just as you can flag for closing. The UI of the flagging dialog for closed post could look like this:  A reopen flag would instantly bring the question into the  review queue, where 3K+ users would vote to reopen (or to leave closed), just like when a reopen vote is cast on a question. This option would be available to everybody except the OP of the question, since he can bring his question to the review queue by editing it. A reputation limit could also be added to prevent abuse, e.g., .
121811
For example...  I closed a vote for 'too broad'. But then I realized I wanted to close it as a specific duplicate of another question instead. So I retracted my close vote.  That worked. But I can't now vote to close as duplicate and the title says I already voted to close.  Maybe this is intentional but it doesn't feel that way.
102271
Often when I vote to close, I want to go back and check the comments on the question, to see if it's been improved, to comment further, or to answer the question.  It would be helpful to add a bit of a trail so I can find those questions again. I'm suggesting adding an event to the Activity page on the user profile, because this is the logical spot for the given action.  I realize the Activity page is public, but I don't see why this content couldn't be added only for the currently logged-in user.  An alternative would be to add a new tab on the user profile page that only lists current-user content, and is not shown publicly. I'm sure there are other events, data, or statistics that could be shown here as well, so I'm certain a new tab like this wouldn't be underutilized.    One thing that could be done instead of this is to always add a comment stating why I voted to close. This works well enough, but only some of the time -- for example, if there is already a vote to close as a duplicate and a comment with a link to that duplicate, I'm not going to add a comment myself if I have nothing to add aside from a close vote.  Another way to do it would be to favourite the question. This only works well to a point since questions that get voted to close don't necessarily end up being downvoted (i.e., for my "closed favourites," I couldn't just look at the last page of my favourites).    Related: Jon Skeet  that votes to close on your own questions be shown in the Recent Activity area, which is not what I'm requesting here.
116126
I read stuff a few weeks ago on Stack Overflow that it was important to vote up questions too. So, I've started doing it, each time I find the question that I was asking myself, I vote it up. But in fact, I remember to vote it up only when I vote up an answer. And, almost all the time, when I vote up an answer, I vote up the question.   So, I was wondering if it would be possible to make a system that, when we vote up an answer, asks us "Would you like to vote the question" or something like this, and we could click "yes" or "no".  Of course, it would show up only if we haven't voted up the question yet.  I think it would make me save about 2 seconds per question. I now it's not much, but as you have probably heard before, when you add this up, you realize that you save a lot of time.
26821
I'm trying to go through and provide answers to every unanswered question (search &quot;closed:0 answers:0&quot;), somewhat following the spirit that was blogged about at  .  However, I'm finding this much more difficult than it needs to be, as many of the questions have already been answered without the use of an &quot;answer&quot; - but instead, in the form of a comment by either the OP or another poster. I wouldn't mind reading through and skipping these, as long as there was some appropriate action I could take to at least assist with preventing these questions from being seen again from the same query - either by myself or another SO member.  Is there such an appropriate action?  Should we vote to close?  If so, using what reason? Even if I vote to close, what are the chances that 4 other users will also view the question and also vote to close?  (i.e., will my individual vote even do any good?  Is there any report to show recent close votes, so that others may also review and contribute supporting close votes?) Should we post some sort of an answer - even just something to the effect of &quot;this was already answered by the OP's own comment to his answer (above)&quot;? Would something like this be appropriate to flag for moderator attention, and let the moderators deal with it?  (Or would this be considered too trivial?) Should we rename the question title to something standard that can be used in a search exclusion?  (Maybe &quot;SOLVED:&quot;?)  Basically, how can I help to denote questions as &quot;This question is no longer in active search of an answer - though better answers may still be appreciated.&quot;? I've already reviewed , which was closed as a duplicate of  - but this requires effort on part of a user who may very likely no longer be active. Otherwise, is there something I should be doing to improve my search to filter out these types of questions? I've run across this many times, so I don't consider it to be a rare issue.  However, the last question like this I just ran across, prompting this question, was .  In this case, the question was self-answered by the OP in the form of a comment, this question is the OP's only question, the OP has no other visible activity on SO, and the OP hasn't been seen on SO since he registered and posted the question 5 months ago. Another one I just ran across is .  However, here the &quot;answer&quot; comment was posted by a reputable and recently active SO member.  Should I leave a comment directed at him, asking him to re-post his comment as an answer, or should I post my own answer echoing his comment?  (Or something else?) Yet another is .  Interestingly, the OP actually self-edited the question to include the &quot;SOLVED:&quot; prefix on to the question, instead of posting his resolving comment as an answer (and ideally accepting it) as he was asked to do by another comment.  This brings up another good idea - is there a &quot;standard&quot; we should use to rename the titles on these &quot;resolved but unanswered&quot; posts that could be used as a search exclusion?  (Also added to the above list.)