When one votes to reopen a question one has already voted to reopen, the message "You have already (or previously) voted to reopen this question" appears: "You have already (or previously) voted to reopen this question" blub
Note that "(or previously)" is unnecessarily redundant with "already", or vice versa.

Can we get one of them removed from the message? That is, can the message be changed to one of the following, or rationale for current message be explained?

"You have previously voted to reopen this question"
"You have already voted to reopen this question"

| |

This is by design: already means "in this round of voting" and previously means "in some prior round of voting".

For example, say that some innocent user posts a single-word-request, with lots of context and well-formulated and everything, and an outsider with mod powers comes along and knee-jerk closes it. You read the question, scratch your head at the closure, and vote to reopen it. A few days later, you encounter the still-closed question again, and not remembering your previous actions, you vote to reopen it again, but the system doesn't let you because you have already voted to reopen it. Now, suppose the question collects four other reopen votes and lives happily for a few days, until another outsider with mod powers comes along and closes it again. Now, if you try to vote to reopen the question, the system won't let you, because you have previously voted to reopen it.

The intent of this functionality is to prevent "close wars" or "reopen wars". It's an unfortunate side effect that it means that a vote of 5 open vs. 2 close can result in a question that is, for all intents and purposes, permanently closed (because it's very hard to collect 5 new reopen votes).

| |
  • That's interesting. So I can't vote to re-open the same question more than once - if it's already been closed, reopened, and closed again. I think this has a bearing on @kiamlaluno's answer to my comment on this question, in that I think it supports my feeling that we should not encourage over-hasty closure before the OP has had a chance to add some missing "context". – FumbleFingers Jan 10 '12 at 23:46
  • 1
    If already means already this round and previously means in a previous round then it should say that! – ThePopMachine Jan 13 '12 at 18:09
  • good to see you're moving on Martha :-) – cindi Jan 13 '12 at 19:00
  • 1
    @cindi: who, me? [bats eyelashes innocently] – Marthaª Jan 13 '12 at 20:04
  • Then wouldn't "previously" still cover both cases? – Casey Chu Jan 15 '12 at 2:03
  • @Casey: no, because "previously" is being used to specifically mean not this current round of voting, but a prior one. – Marthaª Jan 17 '12 at 0:41

You must log in to answer this question.

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