Post History

I haven't voted one way or the other on the linked question. My view is that (ideally) a vote (one way or another) should depend solely on the content of the question (or answer)^[There are some caveats to this, e.g. competition questions which are not fine during the competition but may be fine afterwards.]. The responsiveness of the asker should not be a factor. However, it **does** make sense to delay a downvote, especially after a request for clarification is made, to allow time for the question (or answer) to be improved. There's no point in churning votes^[To be clear, I don't have any problem with people who take the stance that they'll downvote now and change their vote after requested improvements are made.].

If Olin's logic was: "This is a downvote-worthy question, I'll ask for improvement... no response, I'll enact my downvote now," then this seems fine to me. If Olin's logic was: "I don't think this is a downvote-worthy question, but I'm downvoting because the asker is unresponsive," then I don't think this is a good approach.