Yesterday there were twenty-some reopen votes, most of which were for "duplicates" where there was no change in the text. Not one was worthy of being re-opened in my opinion.

This morning, there are 44 reopen votes pending in the review queue. enter image description here

There are also two re-open votes in meta right, but I did not go into them. That seems very odd.

Something odd appears to be happening. I am using the bug tag because that seems most likely, but someone should investigate this pattern in any case.


This appears to be a new feature, as described in this meta.SO post. Questions are automatically added into the reopen queue if the system thinks they might need another look. So take it as an opportunity to do some reviewing and possibly discover a question that actually warrants reopening due to edits made after it was closed.

Do try to review carefully despite the volume. There's no harm in simply leaving a lot in the queue for if it's too tough. Don't hesitate to flag for mod help if you think a question needs it for some reason, for example if you think a duplicate should be merged. Despite the way it's implemented, I think this is an opportunity for us to do some housekeeping. (And don't worry, I'll come do my share with my overpowered votes eventually.)

  • Then it is going way, way, way too far. – SAJ14SAJ Sep 10 '13 at 13:53
  • 1
    @SAJ14SAJ I'm sure they'll tune further, but the thing is, the triggers are basically "edited after closure" and "lots of people are looking at this" - the former may well mean it warrants reopening, and the latter has a good chance of meaning we should just delete it. – Cascabel Mod Sep 10 '13 at 13:55
  • Wow, just read the other post.... 50 a day is a pretty big burden to a site like ours with only about 10 10k users. – SAJ14SAJ Sep 10 '13 at 13:55
  • @SAJ14SAJ: I assume it's not 50 per day on every site, just Stack Overflow. Did you see that many in the queue? It's possible that if they just rolled out the feature here, it tried to pick up everything at once. FWIW, I happen to agree that the current leadership is getting far too fixated on salvaging every last bit of content possible and trying to assuage hurt feelings - it's diametrically opposed to the principles we started out with, which was to emphasize quality over quantity. – Aaronut Sep 11 '13 at 0:34
  • 1
    @Aaronut There were over 50 in the queue briefly; I think it just picked up everything. I know I noticed one that had been edited a couple days after it was posted... last year. And I don't think that salvaging a few questions through this system is diametrically opposed to quality over quantity. We salvage the quality ones (which are infrequent) and get a bit of extra quality content, without compromising the quality of the rest of the site. And if it makes a few users happier, woohoo. – Cascabel Mod Sep 11 '13 at 1:13

You must log in to answer this question.

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