4

I'd like to learn how to proceed in a case where there is disagreement between reviewers about the quality of a question and where it's not clear (at least to me) how I could improve the post further.

I posted a question which apparently wasn't that great. Some editors kindly invested some effort to reword parts of it and managed to clarify the intend behind my question. However, it was closed within a few hours for being too broad.

That's all fine, but at least six people seemed to like the question, four of which have the right to cast reopening votes. This gives me the impression that the question isn't all bad, but needs to be improved nonetheless. My problem is that I don't see how.

My – obviously limited – knowledge make it seem like my question could be answerable within one or two paragraphs. To me, a good answer would be a simple "none" or a short list of protocols, possibly including a brief explanation. People with far more insights into the matter seem to disagree, so I guess my assumption is false.

I'd like improve the question, so not so subtle hints to were I went wrong would be greatly appreciated.

  • 2
    I wouldn't worry about it. Are there any vulnerabilities which cannot be explained using public knowledge of known vulnerabilities was a bit fuzzy (what vulnerabilities? if we knew about them, it wouldn't be public knowledge; the leaked data edit made it clearer), but your question was fine. Some people are rather quick with closing as too broad or unclear, but hopefully, once small details are clarified, just as quick at reopening, as was the case here. – tim Mar 7 '16 at 22:14
  • The original title was pretty terrible, I've got to admit that. Thanks for the feedback! – tarleb Mar 7 '16 at 23:13
  • @TildalWave absolutely ^_^ – tarleb Mar 8 '16 at 8:02
  • Wording questions precisely is always difficult. If you do not get an answer with the first attempt, you can always refine and more concisely express the question. Technical writing skills are always in demand on Stack Exchange! Your improvements suggest that you have them. – Brent Kirkpatrick Mar 11 '16 at 22:48
7

It seems like this was more or less a race-condition, as explained by @tim and @TildalWave in the comments. My question was close-voted due to it's sub-par and unclear title. The title was improved by others when close-voting had already started. The edit couldn't prevent the question being closed, so reviewers started the reopening process. The question was already reopened briefly after this meta-question was posted.

Basically everything worked exactly as designed. You guys rock. Sorry for the noise.

You must log in to answer this question.

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