Okay, normally I'm not one to go against the flow, but do believe there is something important if not innovative to contribute here.

The fact that someone with rank can anonymously downvote on what seems a rather sound and pertinent question, without sharing any comment nor criticism, does not reflect well on this forum itself, if it is to welcome expert knowledge and discussion on even developing frontiers in personal finances.

I am referring to https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/19231/paper-investments-for-options

To me this is VERY similar to questions about portfolio tracking such as Online tools for monitoring my portfolio gains/losses in real time? ...the key difference being: what might be some emerging tools that include support for more asset classes that just stocks (i.e. options).

Even the search term "Google Finance" yields quite a few topics on this site itself, some very popular given the chance: https://money.stackexchange.com/search?q=Google+Finance

  • 3
    To clarify, you don't have a single anonymous critic, you have a known moderator closing your question.
    – C. Ross
    Jan 17, 2013 at 16:18
  • @C.Ross Perhaps, but getting back to the real topic, what would it take to undo the closing etc.? I'm pretty sure essentially the same question is going to get asked next week or month, if not by me then by others, falling right in line within the nature of existing and popular questions here.
    – Marcos
    Jan 17, 2013 at 16:35
  • 2
    To technically reopen or make it worthwhile for reopening? Technically it takes one mod or five users with sufficient rep. For what would make it work, see Chris's answer.
    – C. Ross
    Jan 17, 2013 at 16:41
  • I'm short on time, but real quick: 1) I wasn't the downvote 2) After the edit the question looked to be soliciting opinion 3) no matter what, it's localized and so problematic. Who's going to come back and keep the answers current? How many lists of out-of-date whatever can we find on the Internet? Do we help by adding more? Jan 17, 2013 at 17:12
  • 2
    @Marcos To fix your question, click the "edit" link, and add back detail about what exactly you want to be able to do with the options in the portfolio. For instance, do you need to be able to hold short or offsetting combination positions? Do you need support for particular options exchanges? Real-time price updates? etc. The more specific you can make the question to the problem you are facing and not simply "what portfolio sites support options", the less likely it is considered a list- or poll-type question. Jan 17, 2013 at 18:43
  • 1
    The more specific you can make the question to the problem you are facing This is crucial. There are questions which would otherwise be considered problematic, but are acceptable if worded in certain ways. (For example, some localized questions can be generalized and include the specific details of the problem as an example. The question can then be answered for the asker's specific situations with enough generality to be applicable to others in the future.) Jan 17, 2013 at 22:27

2 Answers 2


The -1 vote you see on your question is due to the fact that the post was closed. The system automatically down-votes a post that gets closed. The down-vote was not explicit.

As to the closure, I'm guessing your question was closed by George because you edited away the detailed information about desired functionality that could have been used to judge the suitability of answers. Removing such information made it a list- or poll-type question, thereby considered "non-constructive".

If you look carefully at the similar question you linked to above, you'll see the poster there did provide functionality requirements. I'd suggest that's what your question is missing now.

  • Indeed, I simplified out the extra stuff about a developer's API etc. for possible future discussions, seeing how easy to grasp, quick questions could yield more answers sooner. And I stick to this decision given the lack of response (actually, it was probably visibile too briefly to gauge what knowledge may have been available here, noteably after the simplification--and with this I take issue).
    – Marcos
    Jan 17, 2013 at 16:43
  • Actually, the order of events was: 1. Question 2. uncredited downvote 3. Edit by author 4. Close(credited) 5. Meta post 6. another downvote, etc. And I'm not one to get technical, just doing my bit to try and expand the community with useful knowledge and productive discussion, just like yourself. The first answer that addresses the question(albeit reduced) wholly would have gotten the checkmark: not a poll.
    – Marcos
    Jan 17, 2013 at 16:57
  • API/AJAX functionality aside, you could/should have left in the other stuff you were looking for. It isn't an issue of whether you'll award a checkmark or not, but whether the question itself is so broad that it will yield a long list of answers that don't attempt to meet a set of more specific requirements. Jan 17, 2013 at 18:32
  • FWIW, here's one of my own older questions on stock screeners that we had closed on the same principle: money.stackexchange.com/questions/400/… .. although it was more explicitly a list- or poll-type question. Note my comment then: "Agreed, goal-oriented would have made this a better question." Jan 17, 2013 at 18:35

Later I found a question that's practically identical https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/3508/sandbox-for-financial-transactions-online-paper-trading-for-buying-selling-stoc?rq=1 except for being specifically about one financial instrument, of stocks. Mine is specifically about options.

  • This is not answering the question you asked above. You can edit your question above to incorporate new information. Click the "edit" link below your question. Aug 13, 2013 at 16:23
  • BTW, it's debatable whether that 3 yr old question is even still suitable. The site has evolved over that time and we're looking for questions to provide more detail. e.g. That question should have mentioned which exchanges are desired, base currency, what functionality (e.g. delayed vs. real time quotes, etc.) Aug 13, 2013 at 17:21
  • You could try your options paper-trading question again, but consider some similar issues: exchanges (country), currency, other functionality. e.g. Covered call writing (implying stock purchases, too) or just long puts & calls? etc. Aug 13, 2013 at 17:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .