5

Are comments of the following form appropriate here?

I vote to reopen[, because of reasons mentioned by user].

If not, how should we handle them?

8

I would say that these comments are sometimes useful as rebuttals to the corresponding close comments. For example, I think there isn't much debate that this is a constructive comment:

I vote to close this question because it is about a definition of a word in English, not a question of philosophy.

It seems then that this is only a fair response:

This question is actually about a particular aspect of a technical use of the word specific in the work mentioned, not English usage in general.

As Keelan points out, this is not necessary to raise attention to it (it's already in the review queue), but it does provide a justification for why others should reopen/not-close. We want to obviously avoid back and forth (that's what the chat rooms are for!), but providing a justification for a vote without getting into a debate seems useful.

2

I will provide an answer to my own question according to my point of view, so that we can vote on it.

I suggest we flag these comments as not constructive and have them removed. I also suggest all users to not post them.

These comments are noise; they clutter up the view. I can see the use of comments of the form

I vote to reopen, because of interesting non-trivial reason.

But comments that don't say anything else than that someone votes for reopening are pointless.

Once a closed question is edited or someone flags/votes for reopening the question, it ends up in the Reopen review queue. Therefore, these comments are not needed to draw attention to the question.

From the help center:

When should I comment?

You should submit a comment if you want to:

  • Request clarification from the author;
  • Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;
  • Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).

These comments are none of these. In addition to that:

When shouldn't I comment?

  • Discussion of community behavior or site policies; please use meta instead.

So, if you feel like a good question was closed and isn't reopened despite having been in the reopen queue for a reasonable time, ask a question about it on meta.

0

Because philosophy StackExchange has a philosophical demand I consider argumentation a suitable, even necessary means when an action does not explain itself without comment. The argumentation may help the moderator or other users to take into account possible reasons for closing, reopening etc. The simplest way to state these reasons is commenting the vote.

Added. To sum up: 1) When the action explains itself, then I advocate no comment. 2) If the cause for the action may not be obvious, then I advocate a comment with argumentation.

  • 1
    This question is about comments that do not provide any argumentation, so this is not really relevant. I agree, though, which I already mentioned in my answer. – Keelan Jan 13 '16 at 15:01
  • Your question considers comments of the form I vote to reopen[, because of reasons mentioned by user]. Hence it also considers comments with argumentation starting with because. – Jo Wehler Jan 13 '16 at 15:17
  • 1
    No, it doesn't. You either use the part in square brackets completely, or you don't. – Keelan Jan 13 '16 at 16:08
  • 1
    I'm not quite seeing how this addresses detail-less "I vote to reopen" comments. Can you amend it? – virmaior Jan 14 '16 at 4:56
  • Since your edit, how is this different from my answer? In any case, I'm glad we can agree on this then. We'll see how this works out in practice. – Keelan Jan 14 '16 at 11:42

You must log in to answer this question.

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