I was not involved in voting to close your original question, but when I saw the same question asked again, I voted to close it as a duplicate. We seem to agree that it was a duplicate and unlike on a discussion forum, duplicate questions on a focussed Q&A site like GIS SE are closed as duplicates as soon as they are noticed.
From the history of your ...
I suspect that I may be one of those "several users [who] keep nagging askers to elaborate" and so I will respond by writing why question (and answer) quality is important to me.
I think the way GIS SE and other Stack Exchanges work, and work so well, is because they are not forums, certainly not discussion forums. They are Q&A sites that ...
As long as
it's sufficiently clear what (single) question is being asked(and that's obvously the case when you've marked it up to appear in bold)
the other questions are indeed there
to motivate the main question
to further explain what aspects a useful answer would have to cover,
I don't think we should enforce an only-one-question-mark rule.
Without knowing more details and examples about questions you are talking about it is impossible to answer this objectively. Questions might get closed incorrectly, though it is subjective to define 'incorrect'. There are well defined guidelines for closing, but they are subjective to each user's interpretation. So we should always trust community's ...
My brief answer is that we already have under-used tools to do this:
moderators can delete questions,
some users can vote to delete questions (and that now includes you),
more users can vote to close questions,
many more users can downvote questions, and
the Roomba does the rest.
This is the long answer:
Within our site the only option we have to ...
In the Reopen Review you will be in the Revision tab by default, which shows what has been changed in the post.
Clicking on the Question (Revised) tab will change the view slightly, into what the question now shows, including an Add Comment link at the bottom of the post (same as if you had opened the question directly).
This way you can add a comment and ...
Stack Exchange does not send notifications to users if their Question is put on hold, closed, marked as duplicate, or if it has been reopened again.
This is detailed in the Meta SE Q&A Send authors an inbox message if their question gets closed
In a (now deleted) answer to that Q&A, Stack Exchange co-founder Jeff Attwood said
We don't believe in ...
I had to go looking for what I think is the answer to this:
I think what @Shog9 is saying at the above link is that, if a question is closed, then it can only be placed in the re-open queue once. After eligible users vote for it to be ...
It's not about your personal feelings. It's about making a better site for anyone who has a similar question and wants an efficient, concise answer to their question. It's completely objective and thus the type of discussion atmosphere you are seeking just doesn't fit the profile of what SE does. I myself use this site almost daily and owe a lot of my ...
The comments you made on your question were not ignored by me (and presumably not by any of our eight elected moderators) because I had not seen them until I followed the link in your question here just now.
You could have brought them to my attention by placing "@PolyGeo" anywhere in any of those comments. That comment would then have appeared in my inbox,...
I too wonder if I am one of the 'nagging' ones...but really, I feel that the more information that the community has, the easier it is to provide a helpful answer to the asker. I didn't click on all of the questions referenced above, but the ones that I did, I didn't feel that I had enough information to spend the time formulating a response for. I have a ...
The ability to retract re-open votes is the subject of a feature request at Meta Stack Exchange - see Ability to retract reopen/delete votes.
It has been open for more than 5 years and appears not to have been implemented nor declined by the Stack Exchange developers.
I have re-opened that question.
I suspect that answering it is of limited value, as you imply, but when users wish to answer closed questions, they can usually be re-opened with a simple flag of type Other to get a moderator's attention to do so.
When answering perhaps you can make sure to specify the version limits of the issue as you know it.
The lines between GIS and SO blur occasionally, particularly when there's a programming question and the answer is general language... however I believe that GIS.Stackexchage is the best place to ask questions that have a GIS component because users of SO aren't going to readily recognize the GIS portions of the code, decide the question is too hard at a ...
One specific point written in Shog's answer I'd like to emphasize is:
A question will only be enqueued once per closure via editing.
If a question is put on hold I try to avoid editing it, if the edit will not contribute for reopening that question. For example, removing 'thanks' or removing superfluous introductory noise to a question which was put on ...
The question you cite is a bit of an anomaly. Typically questions such as this are closed with a comment suggesting how the OP can improve and edit the question. Often the OP adds an edit, flags it for reopening and it is reopened by the community. We also see many questions that are closed and the OP shows no effort to improve the question. There is ...
I'm not an Arc expert but that question makes no sense at all to me. I would have voted to close it as it stands.
I also can't tell if your answer will help future users searching for help, mostly because the question makes no sense.
Rather than getting angry why not edit the question to make what it is about clear.
I have to agree with @PolyGeo on most of his points.
I think this is one of the struggles of being a mod...it's one of the reasons I was reluctant to nominate myself in the last election. I felt that if I did become a moderator, I would actually review fewer posts in the review queue because I feel the community should be voting for itself there.
Far from being in conflict, I view the On Hold / Close voting relationship between the community and its moderators as being one of symbiosis.
When guiding my own moderation the Theory of Moderation is something that I use as a starting point, but it was written on 18 May 2009 and Stack Overflow launched on 15 Sep 2008 i.e. it was great for its time, which ...
I would agree with your motivation and have the same feeling at times. On the other hand,
The close reason itself
"to be deleted, pointless question".
seems to be too broad, and it can be easily abused by reviewers, shrinking a user base that is already small.
Could these choices be expanded to include "immediate deletion,
I was not one of the close voters. If I had been, I would be happy to explain why. To me it seems to meet the criteria to be open which come from the help/on-topic page qualified by Meta Q&As here.
None of the close voters on your question has provided an answer here to explain their votes (and no one is required to explain their vote).
I think this has arisen from the old wording of the non-reproducible custom close reason that can still be found at Improving wording of "non-reproducible" custom close reason?
Questions describing a problem that can't be reproduced and seemingly
went away on its own (or went away when a typo was fixed) are
off-topic as they are unlikely to ...
The closing explanation is a bit longer than that. It also says:
...such questions are off-topic as they are unlikely to help future readers.
This is the close reason we have also when the problem is some specific typo in the code or something similar, because once the typo is fixed, the problem can no longer be reproduced (consequently, rendering the ...