8

Currently, posts deemed by someone in the community to be in need of being closed or reopened are sent to the close/reopen review queues by clicking a link below the post. However, if a moderator selects to close or reopen from a post, their vote is -- as in the queues themselves -- binding.

Currently, moderators only have limited choices when they come across a post in need of a close/reopen vote:

  1. Provide a binding close/reopen vote (in seeming opposition to the SE Theory of Moderation)

  2. Hope some other user chooses to initiate a close/reopen vote for the community to react to.

    (3. Provide a comment and hope someone reacts by initiating a vote)

Moderators are often some of the most active members on various SE sites. In small enough sites or those with relatively few members that actively perform review tasks, many posts fail to be flagged for closing or reopening when appropriate.

I propose the addition of a way for moderators to "flag-to-queue" VTC and vote to reopen posts. In other words, instead of ignoring a post in need of community moderation or providing a binding vote, mods should be able to "flag" the post so that it enters the appropriate review queue to receive community input/voting.

  • Perhaps an additional action can be provided under the mod tools popup menu to "send to queue."

    enter image description here

6
  • 2
    @Glorfindel though the two issues are related, this request is much more specific and less disruptive to the current approaches being employed. This request is much more about catching posts that never even make it into the review queues Apr 27 '19 at 16:15
  • @sonic my question is definitely in the same vein as that post, but I've provided a direct approach which I'd like to see incorporated. (I also disagree that the previous post and mine have been marked as dupes of Add a way for moderators to cast a normal, non binding close/open vote. Casting nonbinding votes in review queues is very different from adding a mod tool to send a post to queue...) Apr 27 '19 at 16:31
  • The one I linked also asks for the same concrete thing. But I do disagree with its duplicate closure; I've thrown a reopen vote on it. (Feel free to edit that request to make it clear why it's not a duplicate.) Apr 27 '19 at 16:36
  • @sonic thank you. Is my final comment about how explicitly I'd like to see this done not different enough? I'm going for a more concrete request -- namely, that an additional mod action be added to the mod tools popup window. . Apr 27 '19 at 16:38
  • I would like something like this. What I currently do is just leave the flag until I see something happened in the queue (or the poster made significant improvements) and act in that direction. Apr 27 '19 at 17:52
  • Spotted this in the review queue (ironically). I've suggested a means to turn off the hammer in the UI so Gold Tag Badge holders can choose to not have binding votes. That would provide a common UI for GTB holders, Moderators, even staff whom didn't want to flip over to their other account just to say 'hey everyone what do you think of this' - this way it answers multiple needs instead of a request for a fix for a specific situation (calling out things, without crushing them).
    – Rob
    Apr 27 '19 at 17:58
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/327407/providing-a-flag-to-queue-option-for-moderators
meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-43
141671
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:NRQYMFZD6AIH42I3NMTLJNRXSYWOFQAP
<urn:uuid:c759b9ef-726c-4469-9d00-0f18d4d523e4>
2021-10-26T04:35:47Z
151.101.129.69
text/html
sha1:SWJPASDCSW7MUQHMRNDKVW5UF7CR42SM
<urn:uuid:29f3d381-c00a-484b-8dc9-e3b0910f72b7>
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/327407/providing-a-flag-to-queue-option-for-moderators
response
<urn:uuid:3662b5e9-694d-4baf-81e1-29c6519bb4cd>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-43
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-135
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/