I just closevoted Understanding figurative meaning of a sentence? because the original question text was virtually unintelligible. I think you need high rep to see that original, so I'll just reproduce it here because it's since been extensively edited...

For exmaple Suicide Squad’ Chases Nihilistic Swagger . Here i looked for the word Nihilistic shows-the belief that traditional morals, ideas, beliefs, etc., have no worth or value and then swagger its refer-a very confident and typically arrogant or aggressive gait or manner. but the actual meaning maybe something else . Please need help. How could i solve my problem .

(That's exactly how it was!)

I really had no idea what was being asked when I closevoted. Presumably I could have worked it out (@P. Obertelli obviously did, in order to do all that laborious reformatting and error correction! :)

As soon as I saw the revised version, I immediately retracted my closevote - because it was really obvious somebody could see a meaningful question there, even though I myself hadn't actually looked at it long enough to see exactly what that question was.

Having (fairly and dutifully, I thought) retracted my closevote, I sat back and read the question fully. I realised straight away that the text as presented didn't mean anything without context (and not knowing of the movie, I couldn't imagine what that context might be). But I knew I couldn't retract my closevote, so I Googled the source thinking to helpfully comment with a link.

But now I realise that Suicide Squad is a movie about which the relevant NY Times review says it chases after the nihilistic swagger of “Deadpool” and the anarchic whimsy of “Guardians of the Galaxy” but trips over its own feet.

Cutting to the chase, my problem is given the OP must have had that context (after all, he can only have read those words in that review) I now find myself strongly motivated to close for lack of prior research (i.e. - Read the other words in the source text!).

Is it my fault I retracted in haste, and must I now repent at leisure? Or is there any support for my feature request?

Could closevote ability be reinstated after retracting at least some types of closevote?

(Specifically, obviously, in my situation where I feel unjustifiably restricted.)

  • 1
    I think there are design difficulties with close voting (which ended up causing you this problem). Shouldn't they allow retraction just like regular up and down voting? ie you can retract once, but after that it's too bad changing your mind too often.
    – Mitch
    Commented Aug 11, 2016 at 19:31
  • You want to retract your retraction plus change the reason for your original closevote? Why not just downvote and add a scathing comment?
    – ab2
    Commented Aug 11, 2016 at 20:49
  • Perhaps this is quibbling, but the question did not lack prior research, and was a great deal better in that regard than many other questions. It was just formatted poorly and failed to properly cite its sources. Since the motivation of the question is clear, and research did not help the questioner realize an answer, I believe this is inadequate reason for closure, and that the question should just be further edited to include the context and definition sources. Also, I feel it's perhaps useful to note that this isn't just an obscure movie, but also a moderately popular Marvel Comics series.
    – Tonepoet
    Commented Aug 11, 2016 at 23:34
  • @Tonepoet: If I'd have known Suicide Squad was a movie, I'd probably have assumed Nihilistic Swagger was one too. But seriously - given the "spoon-feeding" of the exact context in the NY Times review (as I quoted above), how on earth can this be the sort of question linguists, etymologists, and (serious) English language enthusiasts might be interested in asking? Or "formally" answering, though I did do this in a comment. Commented Aug 12, 2016 at 0:49
  • @ab2: I'm sure I write too many scathing comments already. I'm a bit surprised no-one else has closevoted after 6 hours now. But my usual tactic of commenting that a question should be migrated to ELL doesn't seem appropriate here. If people can't understand the usage in the given context they should be improving their grasp of English with simpler texts. Otherwise it's like trying to explain rocket science to babies. Commented Aug 12, 2016 at 0:57
  • @FumbleFingers I was just saying it's not off the topic of this site for the reason you were originally suggesting, not that it's topical. With your new objection, I would suggest that it might be better suited for E.L.L. Although the Gen. Ref. question does mention E.L.L., since research was performed, I think the migration flag is the best option here. Anyway, this line of commentary has little to do with the actual request and comments are not for extended discusson, so if you want to continue discussion on the matter, ping me with a link to chat.
    – Tonepoet
    Commented Aug 12, 2016 at 1:12

1 Answer 1


I think generally this restriction is fine, you should have evaluated the post completely before retracting. So when you retracted it that's your problem and you can very well repent at leisure. Have fun ;)

However there are two more aspects I would like to consider, first the possibility to retract one close vote and bring forth another - which would apply to your case as well - and secondly the reset of that restriction after the question is edited.

In my opinion it should not be possible to close vote, retract and close vote for the same reason. On the other hand it should be possible to close vote for another reason and it should be possible to vote for any reason after the question is edited. After all the new post can be completely different from the previous version.

  • Bottom line: I'd be more than happy to see the ban on casting a second closevote lifted if the question is edited after the first closevote. I would ask for nothing more. Commented Aug 16, 2016 at 12:05

You must log in to answer this question.

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