A few months ago I asked this question:

Is it normal for agency warehouse workers to have such high turnover (UK)?

The question was downvoted, and then closed without any explanation, despite generating some useful answers. I commented to ask for an explanation, but I never received one. I still do not understand fully why it was closed. The only things I can think of are:

  • Too much background. I thought adding more context to the issue might be helpful, but perhaps in doing so I made it look too personal, diverting away from the core question in the title, and made it look more like an "agony aunt" issue. The top answer did deduce that I had an underlying concern that was personal, and I do admit they were right, but obviously I couldn't ask such a question directly on the Workplace SE. Perhaps I should have avoided the context and just pretty much repeated the question in the title.
  • Too specific. Maybe such a question isn't very helpful to others. I am inclined to personally believe that the core question would be helpful, but perhaps I am mistaken.
  • I'm being a nosy git and shouldn't be prying into the working life of my lodger. A viewpoint I can appreciate and understand, perhaps it is something I should not have asked in the first place. It isn't about me, after all, it is about someone else.

The question is pretty stale now, so there's probably no point in editing it to get it re-opened, but any answers here will help me to ask better questions, should I need to, in the future. Thanks.

1 Answer 1


I wasn't one of the ones who voted to close, but I can see their reasoning. The question closed because "Real questions have answers". In other words, your post does a lot of rambling and ranting, and the actual question you are asking is not very clear. Yes, context is important, but in your case the question gets lost amidst all of the background. You don't need to remove information, but your post could benefit a lot from some reorganization and focusing of your question.

However, I do suspect that an additional reason for the close votes was that it is too specific. Answerers would need to have knowledge about warehouse layoff rates in your region of the UK, which is not particularly common knowledge around here. For me that's not enough cause for a close vote (though others may disagree), but add that to a poorly written question and I completely understand.

  • Should I take from this that Workplace SE is pretty US specific? I mean a lot of the questions I see would have varying answers depending on location. Thanks for the answer anyway, it would have been more helpful if someone had said something like this before or just after closing it, but that's a policy question more than anything else. Just one more thing though, could you point any phrases that suggest I was "ranting" or complaining about the situation? I did try to avoid doing this when asking the question, but clearly I was not successful.
    – user32931
    Commented Jun 23, 2015 at 17:00
  • 2
    @Crazymoomin Actually, I don't think 'ranting' applies to your post, though ranting questions to get the same close reason. The rambling And this site is definitely not US specific, and we do allow for questions that are specific to a country or part of the world. It's more that warehouse forklift drivers is a very specific job, and any information about layoff rates (if we had them) would only apply to that niche industry and to no one else.
    – David K
    Commented Jun 23, 2015 at 18:15
  • Would warehouse agency workers be generic enough? Generally the only difference between the forkies and the rest of the agency staff is that they are paid a little more. Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned he was a forklift truck driver.
    – user32931
    Commented Jun 23, 2015 at 18:21
  • 4
    We shouldn't be closing questions for being hard or obscure; if the expert who can answer it isn't here right now, he might come along later. And even if most of our users are from the US (I don't actually know what the geo-distribution is), this isn't a US-specific site. Commented Jun 23, 2015 at 18:27
  • @MonicaCellio - The question was not about navigating the workplace and was a giant rant... that is why I voted to close. This is a my situation sucks am I right question Commented Jul 1, 2015 at 15:21
  • @ReallyTiredOfThisGame I wasn't ranting, I was providing background. I apologise if you misconstrued it that way.
    – user32931
    Commented Jul 2, 2015 at 15:36
  • @Crazymoomin - It is a rant, though granted, it is a milder rant than many I have seen. It is mostly about all the things you think are wrong with your tenant. The question boils down to you feel like you made a mistake in renting to this person and you want us to validate those feelings. That is not what SE is for. Commented Jul 2, 2015 at 17:27
  • @ReallyTiredOfThisGame No it isn't. You are reading too much into the question. If I thought I made a mistake I wouldn't let him go into arrears.
    – user32931
    Commented Jul 2, 2015 at 17:35
  • @Crazymoomin - I have tried to help you, but you do not want that help. There is nothing further I am going to offer you since you refuse to try and see it from our side. I wish you no ill will and it is nothing personal, we have standards here because we want to keep this site high quality and useful and enough of us believe your question falls below those standards as to close it and you so far have no support for reopening. If you want it reopened I suggest you try to make the changes we asked for. Commented Jul 3, 2015 at 3:56
  • @ReallyTiredOfThisGame No offence, but I personally don't see it that way. You haven't tried to help me, all you have done is insist it was a rant when I have told you that is was not. If you want to be helpful, be like the others and make constructive suggestions on how the wording of the question could be improved (If indeed you believe the core question is valid in the first place, which you haven't made clear). It's absolutely fine to close questions, but then to provide conflicting and confusing feedback when the OP asks why is not.
    – user32931
    Commented Jul 3, 2015 at 5:56
  • @ReallyTiredOfThisGame as an addendum, I have said I am not looking for a re-open. I am trying to learn your SE rules so I can post better in the future If I need to. I read your rules but clearly this wasn't enough. If I didn't care, I wouldn't have asked for an explanation in the first place.
    – user32931
    Commented Jul 3, 2015 at 6:00
  • @Crazymoomin - If I believed the core was a valid question I would have edited the question into shape. You do not want the help offered that is fine. Good luck. Commented Jul 3, 2015 at 15:28
  • @ReallyTiredOfThisGame Fair enough. I don't think I can convince you that I didn't intend it as a rant, and you have the conviction (but not everyone here it seems) that the question should have never been asked in the first place, in any shape or form. Unless someone higher up can give a more authoritative opinion, or other members wish to enter into a debate, I guess pursuing this any further is pointless and futile. I would like to thank all of those who have offered constructive feedback, and I will bear all those points in mind in the future. Maybe things will work out better next time.
    – user32931
    Commented Jul 3, 2015 at 18:30

You must log in to answer this question.