3
$\begingroup$

I have seen questions that have been closed and then days later down-voted even though they are closed already. I see no point in allowing this as it negatively impacts the user asking the question and, as the question is already closed, does not benefit the site. Furthermore, if the question has an answer, the user who posted the question can only vote to remove the question after it is closed and therefore cannot stop it from being down-voted.

So I ask, why is it not made so that a closed question cannot be voted on after it is already closed? Also, could this be changed so people cannot vote on a closed question?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I found a question that looks similar on the Meta StackExchange: Block Downvoting a Closed Question. It has a really bad example and got a lot of downvotes for that, but I think some important points of that discussion are: Bad questions should be downvoted. That's what downvotes are for. We want high quality and bad questions should be pushed to the bottom. If a question is closed this is often an indicator, as the question was not fixed in the "on hold" period. Therefore it does benefit the site. $\endgroup$ – Secespitus Apr 12 '17 at 7:16
  • $\begingroup$ Amen — especially pile-on downvotes that just add insult. $\endgroup$ – JDługosz Apr 12 '17 at 12:46
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This is just my opinion, but the comments and answer point to the duality of your question, no you did not ask it, it was brought up. IF they can down vote it, then they can up vote it as well. Down vote is what -2 and an up vote is +10? In my experience else where this entire thing about reputation and down vote and up vote is a real can of worms because people LOVE to act like children. In the end, using my own experience here, things are MORE LIKELY to work as intended here than not. Like in real life one can find an exception. The standard is far more likely the case than the exception. $\endgroup$ – Enigma Maitreya Apr 12 '17 at 13:33
9
$\begingroup$

Question is still there, so it can be voted on.

Downvotes and close votes are tangential to each other. Close votes are about "Should this question really be here? Is it answerable?" and votes are about "Is it well written? Was it researched before posting? Is there a chance it'll be useful for other users?".

Some questions are well written and interesting, and earn upvotes, and still end up put on hold as unclear what you're asking - if it's not quite clear. There is a chance for it to be reopened if the issue is solved, so why wouldn't people vote on it in the meantime?

The same is with the closed questions that are bad. If it's unclear what someone is asking, or too broad, it still can get reopened later. This does not make it magically any more useful, or show any research effort.

And just by the way, if question is closed and should not be here, why it is allowed to up vote it?


Edit: Sensible alternative would be to allow OP to click something like I will edit and fix it - and hide the question until it is edited, or lock votes (up, down and reopen ones) and show a banner like "This question is being improved right now, please come back later." - of course even if not edited, this banner should go away once question moves from [on hold] to [closed].

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ While I do agree with you, I do see a reason to your rethorical question of "reopened if the issue is solved, so why wouldn't people vote on it in the meantime?": If the poster currently is editing it in order to re-open it, then it is slightly unfair to get downvotes on it as it might become so much better after the edit that those downvotes would not have happened. It is unlikely that the poster would go from a very poorly asked question to a great one (I claim from experience of reading questions), but it is still a chance. Sure, one can change the vote, but that also rarely happens. $\endgroup$ – Mrkvička Apr 12 '17 at 9:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mrkvička Votes can be changed after edit, and question can be deleted, edited and undeleted, too. So if OP doesn't want to show his question while editing, he has a way. If he decides that bad version should be visible, he should take the consequences. $\endgroup$ – Mołot Apr 12 '17 at 9:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I did mention that the votes can be changed but, as I said, that too rarely seem to happen. It's a clever idea to delete, edit and then undelete, but that only works if there are no answers and if the poster is aware of such posibillity (which most low quality posters likely aren't). Regardless, I do share you opinion, I just pointed out one occation where the system is unfair - luckily, that occation is so rare that it shouldn't be an issue. $\endgroup$ – Mrkvička Apr 12 '17 at 9:12
  • $\begingroup$ @Mrkvička if there are answers under a closed question, then we were too slow to close. It's our fault. Well, maybe not yours as you can't VTC yet, but it's community and moderators fault. $\endgroup$ – Mołot Apr 12 '17 at 9:15
2
$\begingroup$

If you don't plan to improve the question (or answer) then you can self-delete it and that will remove the votes (whether up or down) on that from your reputation.

If you do plan to improve it then hopefully once you have done that it will be re-opened and start getting upvotes and people reversing their downvotes.

Neither of those scenarios is really helped by blocking the downvoting of closed questions.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .