Scrolling down the long list of closed, migrated and duplicated questions today, I eventually found a gem only to see it was closed.

Fourteen users had up-voted what seems to me a rather interesting question so I added my own to make it fifteen.

And I also added my votes to one of the answers.

Is it really necessary to close a question such as this, just on a technicality ?

  • 4
    You’ll find some entrenched distaste here for SWRs; the usual aspersions lobbed is they’re “guessing games” or “crossword puzzles”. Whether a specific SWRS survives or not is relatively random and depends on which regulars see it.
    – Dan Bron
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 13:13
  • There is no 'ELU' entity that makes motivated actions. It is a collection of individuals. You should ask the three people who closed it. Instead of wondering why, are you actually pushing for it to be reopened?
    – Mitch
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 14:43
  • 1
    @Mitch I just voted reopen. Let us see how it goes from here.
    – Nigel J
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 14:48
  • @DanBron In my own view, SWRs are a creative part of language. Without creativity, language is just data.
    – Nigel J
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 14:49
  • 1
    Two of the three close voters also visit the reopen queues and another user, who regularly visits the reopen queue, just votes to keep questions closed. But there's still a good chance the OP will reopen.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 15:16
  • 4
    And...it's reopened!
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 15:44
  • 2
    @Mari-LouA Only for the nonce. It appears to be heading for an oscillatory state, teeter-tottering between open and closed like some flip-flop circuit behind a light switch.
    – tchrist Mod
    Commented Jul 17, 2021 at 18:15
  • I can't see anything wrong with the question. On the other hand, some of the answers .... Commented Jul 29, 2021 at 11:38

2 Answers 2


It has viewed more than 2,000 times already. The reason it has received so much attention is because it ranks high on the Hot Network Questions list. Such ranking always invalues a question to passersby. :)

I thought it had enough context given already, but others disagreed.

To address their concerns, I have myself provided many example sentences for it so that it can't be justifiably closed for lacking those any longer.

I have removed those examples upon popular demand.

The OP appears to not work on the weekends. We should give him time to return.

To prove my point, I have removed the lock against comments on all posts there. Everyone is now free to abuse the comment system again by getting into long arguments where they don't belong. Which is what is going to happen. Again. You'll see.

  • 2
    It's nice of you to work to open the question, even though it's actually still locked. You should remove every one of your example sentences, though. The gatekeeping was toxic (also here) and it would be nice if the mods would note people closing obviously welcome questions like this and talk to them until they stop biting.
    – lly
    Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 10:36
  • 2
    Your first instinct was right & the arguments that the question didn't have enough context were in bad faith. Likewise your edits, however well meant, actually changed the question being asked. The original question was clearly focused on increasing in actual monetary value; your new example sentences (included without obvious discussion w/ OP) only consisted of entirely different symbolic senses of value. They should be removed or emended to reflect the actual question being asked, especially as there were already several answers detailing that words for symbolic meanings shouldn't be used.
    – lly
    Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 10:40
  • @lly I myself had thought there was enough context already,but people kept saying otherwise and voting to close. Hence the edits. I was hoping the OP would return. Certainly the example sentences can be remove. I imagine then people will close it again because of that. The comment-locking is to draw discussion to chat or meta where it belongs, not on the question itself.
    – tchrist Mod
    Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 12:29
  • And now the example sentences are removed, likely because they proved the question unanswerable. It seems like we're back to where we started, a request for a word without any context provided other than an S-V-O frame.
    – DW256
    Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 13:00
  • 2
    @DW256 I removed them upon demand. It seems impossible to please everyone here.
    – tchrist Mod
    Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 13:17
  • 3
    @lly All comment locks have now been removed. Everyone is again free to abuse the system by pointlessly arguing in infinitely long comment threads there just like before. Hope this helps and have a nice day.™
    – tchrist Mod
    Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 14:32
  • Your answer is self-serving. The info you provide does not address the issue (mutilation of the original question; closure that should not have happened). You are not right, you are wrong, and you do not have the awareness to see that. Instead, you are providing "long arguments" that you yourself decry. The short answer would be to apologise for the closure; the mutilation. Which erorrs have been proved by the reversals, and thus the errors are beyond dispute. Commented Jul 18, 2021 at 23:33
  • 9
    @PerformanceDBA I'm sorry members of our community closed the question. I thought this unjust so I tried to rescue it before a second closure: a mod clears pending close votes by closing and immediately reopening it, which I did after editing it to provide the putatively absent context. Your words about "mutilation" are rude and borderline abusive. I was trying to make sure the question didn't get closed again. We're all volunteers here trying to do our best. Please assume good intent by default, and stop attacking the very people who are trying to help you.
    – tchrist Mod
    Commented Jul 19, 2021 at 0:55
  • 5
    For what it's worth, @tchrist, thank you for partially living up to your namesake and doing the right thing (both with the reopening and the de-editing) even though you just got more abuse for your trouble. It's always unusual and appreciated to have good and thoughtful mods, since it's so generally a thankless position.
    – lly
    Commented Jul 19, 2021 at 19:49
  • EL&U Alice in Wonderland's 404 page has been replaced with a hazard sign.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Jul 30, 2021 at 6:03
  • Please write an elegy for Alice on meta, she will be missed by all who loved her.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Jul 30, 2021 at 6:04
  • english.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1918/…. Could you post a link to the image used, the one with Alice peeping round a curtain. I would like to save it on my computer.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Jul 30, 2021 at 6:14
  • BTW, wasn't there a rule at one time that prohibited commenting on other comments? Which wouldn't be as much fun, sometimes, but it would prevent me from…thinking I'm Underdog, sometimes. If I couldn't then I wouldn't.
    – user294180
    Commented Aug 4, 2021 at 4:24

The answer seems to be given by the OP when he says

@lly Haha, fair enough, though it answered my curiosity well. I didn't have a specific context in mind.

You will note that, because of this, no answer can be correct such that another person, seeking the answer to the same question, could reasonably say "Ah yes! The word I want in this context* is "xxx".

You must log in to answer this question.

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