5

Possible Duplicate:
Can we have the ability to rescind a close vote before it closes?
Can we re-request features that were declined a sufficient while ago?

I was researching a specific feature (rescinding close votes, seen here: Can we have the ability to retract a close vote before it closes?) and it leads to a more broad discussion that I think is meta-specific: how do we discuss items that have old discussion but perhaps warrant a reconsideration?

It's been almost 3 years since this was first proposed. Is there a process for revisiting old decisions in general? My concern is trying to re-open discussion on old issues will just get blanket-closed as duplicates.

This is not like most of our questions on various sites: these don't have a "right" or "wrong" answer other than when someone with enough clout says "we're doing this" or "we're not doing this". But there needs to be a way to go back and reconsider the latter category within our question workflow.

  • 3
  • This is neither my old question, nor unanswered. It was answered and declined. My question is: how do we revisit what is essentially an executive decision -- how do we re-propose ideas after a suitable amount of time? – Joe May 20 '12 at 12:04
  • Yeah, that one's actually mistitled. It should be "How do I get attention for an old, unanswered question?" The point is you don't need to re-propose them, they've already been proposed once and there's nothing wrong with the original proposal. – Cody Gray May 20 '12 at 12:08
  • 1
    You might want to consider splitting these two questions into separate posts to make it easier for everyone to respond. – Adam Lear May 20 '12 at 12:23
  • 3
    @TheEstablishment: In the general case, sure. But on meta, where feature requests have a terminal status, I don't think it quite works. People see "feature-declined" and that's that, no matter how long ago it happened. – Joe May 20 '12 at 12:28
  • I disagree. Perhaps people see it that way, but that's not how I see it. Feature requests can be revisited, even if they were once declined. The existing system (posting a well-argued answer in support of the feature, placing a bounty, etc.) seems to work just fine. – Cody Gray May 21 '12 at 9:45

Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/133111/how-do-we-re-open-feature-discussions-after-some-length-of-time?noredirect=1
meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2020-16
120081
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:2KXKSECVHRJ6CAJPQ2LCRFXZZYL3G2PN
<urn:uuid:fe3e4c65-f2db-4790-bc8c-14190ae0ecf0>
2020-03-30T08:12:31Z
151.101.129.69
text/html
sha1:3AHEANKA6Q4PB4FY3JAH7URH6PTKYEZH
<urn:uuid:ba9a596c-ef3d-48bd-b2d3-b81d3515b2a2>
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/133111/how-do-we-re-open-feature-discussions-after-some-length-of-time?noredirect=1
response
<urn:uuid:b67d9174-b27b-4352-a691-19bd195b1187>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2020-16
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for March/April 2020
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-202.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/