At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
The Connections Academy issue has been raised a lot, so I think we should have an ability to issue close-votes which'd make the work pretty fast. I can't be specific as to what the least level is for closing questions since this idea is not well thought out for this site. What closing a question will do (in this case) is it won't allow others to respond anymore. I think there should be three close-votes for closing down a question. If the asker posts a question again, we can close it again. I am not sure about the rest. Maybe we can formulate it... what say?
Not until, the fix the e-mail problem. People could then easily abuse the system if they didn't fix the sign-up email problem. Otherwise I'd agree with you idea 100% And +1.
@FirstFrostByte This now seems like Stack Network with all the close-votes and +1s lol.
Yeah your right it does seem to be like Stack Network. O.o... But what can you do those are some great ideas.
@FirstFrostByte Are you also on the Stack Network? Username?
I'd like to see this too.
There is much discussion about the Connections Academy problem (noting too that getting/giving just answers goes on among quite a few non-CA students here too) I am intrigued by giving users a "vote to close" option, with some minimum threshold needed to actually close the question. Perhaps votes to close could be weighted as medals currently are - with input from established, highly ranked users counting for more than votes from newer, less experienced users? Though I am reluctant to disable further discussion of closed questions. Much discussion of tutoring and correction goes on after questions are closed, as well as much further answer swapping. And without this feature, I don't see how closing by popular vote would have much influence on the CA problems. I can also see how it would open new avenues for abuses - popular people with many friends ganging up on certain users by forcing their questions closed... :/
@blues: What usually happens on sites is that the name of the people who closed it and the reason is shown.
It is an intriguing idea - but as I said, I don't see how it would have all that much effect on the cheating problem. Unless responses for closed questions were disabled, which would nix much profitable discussion and quality control by other tutors too. And it introduces potential for abuse. And with other less draconian and more effective ways to approach the cheating problem, I don't see why we should go down this road...?
I did mention that people would not be able to reply! Or should we say, "deleting" instead of closing?
By "Able to reply" you mean that people would no longer be able to post to closed discussion threads? I don't like that idea. A lot of quality control happens on closed questions - people go through and correct wrong answers (for scale, about half the Just answer responses in the biology group are wrong answers), we discuss solutions and concepts (usually discussion between tutors, not tutor-asker, but hopefully the asker gets insight both into the science and how the science is shaped). We would lose all this if we disabled responses to closed questions. And what we would gain by it would not be that much and we could achieve it other ways. My 10 cents worth...
And I'm not for publicly naming users who vote to close. Frankly, a significant minority don't have the maturity to cope with it. I can see it starting and escalating many fights.
Then something like high-level users viewing who closed it? And moderators could reopen if they think that it didn't deserve to get closed.