So, you are proposing that when an editor inappropriately closes a UR without adding a comment that the conversation be automatically followed by that editor? I can see why that could be useful, but frankly, the editor who mass-closes URs without following proper procedure is also the editor who doesn't give a crap and 1) likely wouldn't respond to comments anyway, or 2) has an invalid email address and so will never know where exactly that UR is located (because the in-app notification has no way to point to the location exactly).

I am not clear from this discussion what happen if you comment in a UR and then close it. Do you then get notice of subsequent comments from the reporter?

SuperDave1426 wrote:FWIW, whenever I close a UR, I always post a closing comment first. I've always felt that's a good policy - it lets the reporter know what you did before you marked it as "Solved" or "Not Identified." I find it especially to be a good idea if I've got the solution to something that another editor started on, as it lets both the reporter and that other editor know why I'm closing it. It's a courtesy to both of them.

Also, it results in my "following" the UR since I commented on it, thus alleviating the problem that you describe here.

Like I said, just for whatever it's worth...

I think the problem qwaletee wants addressed is when editors just go through mass-closing URs without leaving a comment when there's either on-going conversations, requests for more info, or recently reported URs that haven't yet been investigated (i.e. those who aren't following the guidelines and are just trying to rack up points).

Kobes1878 wrote:

"The update request has no comments, are you sure you want to close it?"

or possibly

"Closing UR's without attempting to solve them is considered bad practice and may result in loss of editing rights, are you SURE you want to close it?"

Although I concur with the sentiment of Option 2, there is no way to conclusively determine if any work was accomplished en route to closing a UR.

Regarding Option 1, I would offer that instead of a "no comment check" that we check for a closing comment.

Probably the easiest way is for the "new" alert dialog to contain a space to enter our closing comments. That would help everyone, as even the studious editors often forget to comment.

Click the Solved or NI radio-button, execute (Next), get the pop-up, enter comment (or not), click Save.

CBenson wrote:I am not clear from this discussion what happen if you comment in a UR and then close it. Do you then get notice of subsequent comments from the reporter?

I have received responses in alternate testing. It does however require the reporter to respond in WME as he no longer will have the ability to answer on the client.

Taco909 wrote:

CBenson wrote:I am not clear from this discussion what happen if you comment in a UR and then close it. Do you then get notice of subsequent comments from the reporter?

If you comment, send, and close, it subscribes you. I've seen this.

My question though...

I'll open a UR, click "Solved" THEN post and send a comment. I don't know if that one subscribes you or not. Why do I question? When I post a comment, hit send, then when I click "Solved" I get the warning pop-up that there is a pending message not received.
That popup does not appear when hitting "Close" after commenting on a "solved" UR.

Yes, you will will receive email notifications after commenting on a closed UR and the reporter responds in WME. You made me curious so I tested it.

The automated e-mail idea for aging UR's is great.

Speaking of pop-ups, here's a thought that may help solve this issue. When attempting to close a UR with no comments, can we get a pop-up as well? This one should say

"The update request has no comments, are you sure you want to close it?"

or possibly

"Closing UR's without attempting to solve them is considered bad practice and may result in loss of editing rights, are you SURE you want to close it?"

I would suggest simply making it impossible to close UR's w/o comments, but that would most likely "require to much back-end work".


Edit: This may actually be a solution for a lot of the problems we've been experiencing (ie. mass deletion of UR's, untimely closing of UR's etc.) If this idea is accepted by the community we can ask to have specific pop-ups for different situations. For example: "This UR has comments from another editor, please contact the editor prior to closing" etc et al.

AlanDias89 wrote:Consegui o humor monstro hoje....

Wrong thread. Wrong forum. Wrong page. Wrong discussion. Wrong topic. Wrong country. Wrong language.

But bienvinedo nonetheless

SuperDave1426 wrote:FWIW, whenever I close a UR, I always post a closing comment first. I've always felt that's a good policy - it lets the reporter know what you did before you marked it as "Solved" or "Not Identified." I find it especially to be a good idea if I've got the solution to something that another editor started on, as it lets both the reporter and that other editor know why I'm closing it. It's a courtesy to both of them.

Also, it results in my "following" the UR since I commented on it, thus alleviating the problem that you describe here.

Like I said, just for whatever it's worth...

The problem described here is more aimed at those who don't follow the wiki, and there have never even tried asking for more info before closing. They don't know to leave a comment before closing, and close URs wholesale in an area.

If that action could at least trigger them to follow those URs, then if one of those reporters were to click the link in their email and respond with better details, at least the editor who closed it would be notified of the response. As it stands now, an editor closes a UR and forgets about it. If the reporter responds, nno one noticed unless someone else was watching.

If you comment first, then you automatically follow the conversation.

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:So, you are proposing that when an editor inappropriately closes a UR without adding a comment that the conversation be automatically followed by that editor? I can see why that could be useful, but frankly, the editor who mass-closes URs without following proper procedure is also the editor who doesn't give a crap and 1) likely wouldn't respond to comments anyway, or 2) has an invalid email address and so will never know where exactly that UR is located (because the in-app notification has no way to point to the location exactly).

I would say in some cases that editor is more of the uneducated type then the careless. I've had several positive results responding to those editors through PM. Thats not to say there are no careless one though too, I still have a bunch of PMs which were never read. So this could help on some cases.