Are statuses optional on Meta when the question has accepted answers?

@DanielBeck we don't need a status on everything

some things can be closed, other's left alone, and some with statuses...

we really just leave the status stuff for stuff that is clearly, emphasis clearly, by design or complete, or declined, and a lot of that has to come from the official level (i.e. we are official saying this feature request is declined)... @DanielBeck make sense?

Makes sense. I was just going through the bugs. Several have accepted diamond replies and no status. I was wondering about that.

Still, how do you determine whether a bug tagged topic still is open?

If not via statuses?

if a dev or a diamond hasn't replied to it and declared it one way or another, then we can't really do much

sometimes we just let them go. we can't deal with everything

@studiohack You saw my flags. There were diamond answers, some even accepted. I always thought statuses were used for quickly determining what's open from the question list, that's why I flagged these topics.

@DanielBeck yeah true. but some were still ambigous. like one had Ivo answering "I think"...

@studiohack See former diamond Diago's comment to it.

From the time where he was a diamond.

okay, so this is a support issue, not a bug then

so I'll retag it support.

@studiohack Apparently diamonds can clear the migration and should be doing so before another migration. That didn't happen here, so the close reason is missing. Sounds a lot like status-bydesign and user error.

@DanielBeck that's correct.

And that's what I flagged for.

as for statusby-design, that can be a little shady territory. that may not be an intended design

gonna leave this one be, tagged as support

I'm impressed though. I checked 6 or 7 pages of bug topics ordered by votes (down to ca. 3 up votes), and only 3 or so are currently open.

that is pretty good. like I said, we can't always get everything cut and dried the way we'd like. I'd love to have everything status complete or not... but sometimes it just doesn't fit

@studiohack status-rejected always fits :-)

Or status-bydesign.

@DanielBeck we don't have rejected. declined, yes, mostly for feature requests.

ah well. thanks for the efforts @DanielBeck

So, how often do you guys handle flags by an OP asking for reopening?

I'd love some feedback on how you see this as a problem (i.e. users "whining" about reopening, or users not being able to have their question reopened)

Especially with regards to what Jeff says

@slhck Diago was a mod when he left that answer

@IvoFlipse I know, but it's not visible anymore that he ever was. Especially for new users who don't know the history.

mixed bag of how I feel about OP's whining about reopening

depends on how they ask and if they've actually done any work to improve the post

Hm, my point is.. there are surely a couple of questions that were closed, then edited, and then left like this, since there's no real guideline on whom to ask for having it reopened

the low traffic on SU just doesn't give us enough reopen votes

we get enough traffic, IMO, but not enough turn over. once users look at a question, not a lot of them are going to look at it again

exactly

So if I'm a new user, I'll probably try and fix my question, and then leave a comment "Here, I fixed it" — now what?

I sure understand Jeff's concern. It's clearly a bit different on SO.

flag the post? I'm not sure.

@studiohack See? :) Flag it? Post a reopen request on Meta?

@slhck see what?

@studiohack "see, there's no real guideline"

yeah, options would be to post a reopen request on MSU (like you said), flag... and perhaps even add a comment saying "hey, I edited, can I have my question reviewed? (and ie reopened)

ahh, gotcha @slhck, brain is a little dead ;)

so yes, I would support a FAQ change.

Haha, I can understand, must be quite late at your place.

Or early, for that matter.

would be nice if we had one of those little popups or some text that suggested to the user the next course of action after his question was closed.

you know, like if it was closed as a dupe, it would say... maybe nothing. Too localized, it would suggest broadening it or leaving it be. scratch that. too complicated.

Ah, probably too complicated.

but for NC, and NaRQ, we could have pop up reasons. like state what the question is

The FAQ explains it anyway.

or your question is not constructive for the following reasons. ah yeah.

we need to FAQ people more. how about an automatic box after the user has had his first close, that he gets another READ THE FAQ thingy

@studiohack Yeah.. I know that all to well. Used to be most productive after 11PM.

@slhck lol :)

I don't think we'd even need to change that much. The point is: Most users won't care. Question closed, move on. Those that do care actually put a lot of effort in it. But how is anybody gonna notice?

I used to record music after everybody went to sleep so it wouldn't be too embarrassing, haha

@slhck yeah, you're right... most people are fine with it. there are the edge cases that would be nice to streamline some parts of the process...

So, maybe all we need is another sentence in the closing part in the faq stating that you can flag for mod attention to reopen if you've tweaked your post enough to make it better. and/or post reopen request on Meta

Yeah, essentially, that's what I rewrote my [feature-request] to.

a RR on MSU would prompt some of the more involved users to re-look at that post and consider voting to reopen

But Jeff insists that this enables whining.

without diamond intervention

Yup.

so that's Jeff's issue

huh, okay. well.... not sure what to say about that

of all the RR on MSU, most of them aren't really whining. in fact, a bunch of them, IIRC, are other users asking to reopen the OP's post

ah well. that's my thoughts for now... gonna finish my episode... talk to you later @slhck :)

okay, see ya then! @studiohack