If a question is close worthy, but hasn't been touched in years should I vote to close?

It seems wrong to necro-moderate, but presumably it helps clean up the site.

| |

There's no reason not to VTC if you think it is VTC worthy, BUT:

  1. If there's no activity on the post, there's less chances 4 other people would notice it and join VTC (depending on how active Close queue reviewers are, I guess); so your chances of success are low(er)

  2. If it still isn't closed, there's a chance you're not necessarily correct in assuming it should be VTCed. That's just a heuristic - it's possible it simply slipped through the cracks. IOW, think twice if it deserves a VTC, but don't let that consideration stop you if you're sure.

  3. If you have a finite amount of effort you can put in, you'll definitely do more good moderating more recent content (the goal of closing a question is largely to prevent poor answers from being posted. If the question is old, it either already had them posted, or none were - and chances of new ones are low). But if you're already looking at old VTCable Q, go for it.

| |

Our rule of thumb on SO is we don't go out of our way to touch older questions unless they're promoting new problems (i.e. an old opinion question gets a new answer).

What plays in your favor here is that the queues are non-existent (SO perpetually has 8-10k in the Close Vote Queue) so your CV won't get lost in the shuffle. But I think queue participation is also low. Just remember that close votes age away after 14 days

| |

You must log in to answer this question.