We recently made some changes the voting interface for Area 51 example questions. The improvements are designed to make the voting experience more like that of an actual, launched Stack Exchange site. Upvoting, downvoting, closing questions: It's all in there!
Gone are the days of trying to figure out what voting "not a good example" means. It's been replaced with the ability to close questions, just like you would on a real Stack Exchange site. If a question is a poor fit for the site, close it as "off topic", "not constructive", "not a real question", etc. If you don't agree with a closure, vote to re-open. Questions can be discussed and improved in comments. This works just like any other Stack Exchange site!
Moving a proposal into Commitment is still a matter of picking your favorite example questions, but now it's done through upvoting and downvoting. Questions can be upvoted if you think they’ll be interesting, downvoted if you think they won’t be. Once you come up with at least ten questions that embody the topic’s scope, the proposal moves on to Commitment.
Side note: We no longer require communities to find five good 'off-topic' questions. It's important to propose questions that push the boundaries of the topic, but we're hoping to determine what voting pattern identifies an "excellent off-topic question" based on actual usage. It's just not currently part of the Definition phase requirements.
Overall, I think you'll find the more-familiar interface a refreshing change. We mapped the "old voting" into the new system and the progress of most sites changed remarkably little. You can read about the changes and reputation level requirements in the
There may be a few gotchas we didn't consider, but we'll work those out when we see how these features play out under actual use. If the quality of proposed questions get half the attention they receive on a live Stack Exchange site, the end-product coming out of Area 51 should improve dramatically.