Timeline for Should the "broken code" close reason be reworded?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 20, 2015 at 10:33 | history | rollback | nhgrif |
Rollback to Revision 2
|
|
| May 20, 2015 at 10:28 | history | rollback | nhgrif |
Rollback to Revision 1
|
|
| May 20, 2015 at 3:26 | comment | added | JS1 | @h.j.k. Ok I made my own meta post about that question. | |
| May 20, 2015 at 3:26 | answer | added | h.j.k. | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 20, 2015 at 3:15 | comment | added | h.j.k. | @JS1 I don't think so...? Probably easier to ask a question here and tag it with "specific-question". | |
| May 20, 2015 at 3:13 | comment | added | h.j.k. | @JS1 feel free to post a question here at Meta about that (I know which you're talking about :)), my short take on those questions is that if the bugs are relatively trivial, then we should just be kind and point out. If the bug significantly alters their understanding of the question they were given, then that's more likely to be a close reason... | |
| May 20, 2015 at 3:12 | history | edited | h.j.k. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 'opposites of' for clarity.
|
| May 20, 2015 at 3:12 | comment | added | JS1 | I have a question about this as well. I voted to close a question because it had bugs in it. In my opinion, the OP would have found at least one of these bugs if they had spent even a little effort in testing. However, if the OP was not aware of any of these bugs, is the question still on topic? | |
| May 19, 2015 at 20:46 | history | asked | nhgrif | CC BY-SA 3.0 |