-12

VTC are private unless the question is closed. Yet multiple mods here have no problem publicly blasting this information. Why is this happening? http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/36186597#36186597

  • 6
    Is it an actual SE policy that close votes are private unless the question is closed? I thought you could see that information in other places (the review queue history, the close vote dialog, etc.)? – KutuluMike Mar 22 '17 at 13:55
  • movies.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2697/… and yes. The system is designed to not show it unless it's closed. The review queue is separate from normal VTC and VTO. – cde Mar 22 '17 at 13:58
  • 2
    How is that chat message revealing anything about a close vote? You may need to include more context.... – Skooba Mar 22 '17 at 14:23
  • 1
    Mod is abusing their privledge to see confidential close votes, then demanding the user answer by disclosing it on chat. – cde Mar 22 '17 at 14:26
  • 3
    @Skooba just from the chat message I can surmise that cde cast a close vote and the mod was asking him publically to justify it. – KutuluMike Mar 22 '17 at 15:49
  • 1
    I'm afraid @cde that I don't really understand the context from this one chat either. And I have not conferred with the other moderators either. – iandotkelly Mar 22 '17 at 18:25
  • 3
    Maybe we shouldn't resort to calling other users names when they are just trying to understand the problem and help to work it out. Not too appropriate to call Mike a liar, imo. – steelersquirrel Mar 22 '17 at 18:41
  • 3
    Agreed @user22792. Can we please all draw a breath. You've raised an issue and KutuluMike is at least trying to understand your complaint. All you've done is give us a link to a single point in a conversation with little of the back story here. – iandotkelly Mar 22 '17 at 19:34
  • 1
    Ahh - so passerby is you (cde) .... that makes it a little more clear. – iandotkelly Mar 22 '17 at 19:50
  • 3
    Ok, so now I understand the question, I'll give my take on it. IMHO VTC is not really intended to be confidential information. It will appear in the UI when the post is finally closed - which I assume is your intention when you vote, and if it's done in the review process your review is also publicly available too. The intent of not publishing the names on the post itself until the close happens is to prevent behavior such as people jumping on when they see other high rep users VTC - the "oh they must be right, I'll help them!" syndrome. You are meant to consider the close reasons yourself. – iandotkelly Mar 22 '17 at 21:53
  • 5
    The behavior that's intended to be prevented isn't revenge on the person that voted to close - since in most cases it will become public anyway, and if I VTC I fully intend to stand behind my vote and will happily discuss its merits. Its intended to stop a feed-forward effect to make the close inevitable if some respected members of the site VTC. If you feel that I'm not taking this seriously enough, please let me know and we can have a chat about this at some point. – iandotkelly Mar 22 '17 at 22:00
14

Well, the short answer here is he didn't.

No, really - he asked you, "how character attribute analysis is trivia now?" - no mention of close voting, or even the question to which the comment referred.

Now, given you'd just voted to close a particular question as trivia, the context would've been obvious to you... But not necessarily anyone else. In fact, neither one of you revealed either critical bit of context in public until this post (although you hinted at it a few hours later by leaving a public comment on the question calling it "trivia").

Beyond that... Keep in mind that moderators can instantly make all close votes public information by closing the question, so there's no real point to requiring them to keep them private if they don't do that. If you don't want people to know you'd voted to close, then don't vote to close - that's the only sure way.

OTOH, if you're voting to close questions that you don't think should be closed, arguably you're abusing the system, so... Stop doing that.

  • So why doesn't the system show close votes without mod intervention? And what makes you think I don't think that question is trivia and shouldn't be closed... – cde Mar 23 '17 at 1:44
  • 5
    It does - the instant a question is closed, you know everyone who voted to close it. I have no idea what you really think of the question, but I will note that you've spent more time discussing the privacy of your vote than you have discussing the problems wrought by the question you voted on. – Shog9 Mar 23 '17 at 1:47
  • No, why doesn't it reveal close votes prior to a close. Like when a question isn't closed or reopened and has pending votes. Its by design that only successful close votes are disclosed, no? – cde Mar 23 '17 at 1:48
  • 5
    To what end? If you vote to close a question as a duplicate, the system generates a comment so that your choice can be discussed - and your vote is known. If you vote to close a question for a non-standard off-topic reason, the system generates a comment so that your reasoning can be discussed... Otherwise, why bother? – Shog9 Mar 23 '17 at 1:50
  • So why not broadcast who close votes right away? Why wait for 5 or a mod to close it? – cde Mar 23 '17 at 1:51
  • 5
    Again, to what purpose? The question page is the most heavily-trafficked page on the site by far - the cost every bit of unneeded information, every unnecessary database lookup is multiplied by millions of viewers every day. Even when the question is closed, we don't break out each vote by time and exact reason chosen, we just list the voters; in most cases, there's no good reason to do otherwise. – Shog9 Mar 23 '17 at 2:00
  • 5
    And before you ignore what I just wrote and ask me the same question for a third time, stop and ask yourself what your goal is here. Clearly, you don't give two hoots about whether the question was closed or not, since you've long ago given up discussing it. Neither do you particularly care whether or not anyone knows you voted to close it, since you went back and co-signed your close reason with a comment (and then followed that up with this meta post). But you have posted three meta posts here today, so clearly you're upset about something - stop being coy and spit it out. – Shog9 Mar 23 '17 at 2:03
  • Here you argue that close votes are supposed to be private. And exposing them without good cause isnt okay. Did that change then? meta.stackexchange.com/questions/145089/… – cde Mar 23 '17 at 2:08
  • 2
    I just got done saying that we don't expose them when there's no cause to do so. Like, at least twice. – Shog9 Mar 23 '17 at 2:10
  • Yet here they did. And if I go back a few days, they did before. You hair splitting that they didn't is a poor attempt at deflection. When even two people who actively vote me down think that it is was done. See kululu comment above and rand comment that is linked. – cde Mar 23 '17 at 2:15
  • 6
    Deflection... I just spent an hour trying to discuss this with you, and you haven't read a thing I've written. Don't waste my time. – Shog9 Mar 23 '17 at 2:16
  • 4
    I observe that we're back at wild accusations of people "actively voting you down". (Such a claim is rather difficult to back, at least from normal users, moderators on the other hand have a bit more to go on when investigating suspicious vote patterns.) It might be there's no reasonable end-game to be reached with this discussion here and people's time is indeed wasted. – Napoleon Wilson Mar 23 '17 at 2:18
  • 3
    @cde if you're accusing me of actively downvoting you then you should probably focus your anger elsewhere. I'm more than willing to share my vote history if it will help do that, but on a hunch I've just dug through your top-voted answers, and I'm on page 20 (so 600 answers) and so far 0 downvotes – KutuluMike Mar 23 '17 at 12:30

You must log in to answer this question.

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