-13
$\begingroup$

While waiting for Alex Gruber to recharge his batteries, the moderation is working slowly. For instance, on September 3 I've voted to close this question as a duplicate. I was certain from the very beginning that my vote is a waste of time, since one needs some knowledge and willingness to perceive why that question is a duplicate, and after some hours I've decided to flag the question as a duplicate, counting on the moderators attention. I was right, and the question was closed as a duplicate, but surprisingly, reopened instantly by Pedro Tamaroff. I supposed this happened because the moderator closed the question as a duplicate of How to find solutions of linear Diophantine ax + by = c?, an obvious mistake. So far, so good. I've flagged the question again as a duplicate, mentioning the possible mistake made by the moderator. Since then my flag is pending. So let me ask:

Dear moderators, what's going on with my flag?

$\endgroup$
  • 11
    $\begingroup$ Why are you wasting the moderators' time by flagging things as duplicate rather than casting votes like you are supposed to? $\endgroup$ – Tobias Kildetoft Sep 7 '16 at 12:24
  • $\begingroup$ Is it alright with you if a non-moderator answers this post? If not, then you might want to communicate with the moderators privately instead of publicly like this. $\endgroup$ – Joel Reyes Noche Sep 7 '16 at 12:42
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I think the questions just are not duplicates. If I were a mod, I would think the flag should be declined but since another mod already was on the question I might well leave it to this particular one. I do understand that the post you mentioned in the comment and one of the dupe targets in the closure give specific examples and thus in a way answer the question, but this does not make the questions duplicates. Abstractly the question "Is there an example of Phenomenon P?" is not duplicate of "Verify this particular thing that happens to be instance of Phenomenon P." $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 7 '16 at 12:53
  • $\begingroup$ Should this be tagged (specific-flag)? Or is this about discussing a more general issue and the links and the mentioned flags serve only as an illustration? $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 13:39
  • $\begingroup$ I think it is worth mentioning that in the close votes review there were two close votes and three votes to leave open. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 13:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @TobiasKildetoft If I understand this answer correctly, flagging as a duplicate and casting duplicate close vote do exactly the same thing for 3k+ users. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 13:54
  • $\begingroup$ @TobiasKildetoft I do not quite understand your comment. OP explains (my emphasis) "on September 3 I've voted to close this question as a duplicate. I was certain from the very beginning that my vote is a waste of time, since one needs some knowledge and willingness to perceive why that question is a duplicate, and after some hours I've decided to flag the question as a duplicate," Looking at the review-history it appears the gap was rather even larger, and in any case the question was likely past review when the post was flagged (for mod attention). $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 7 '16 at 13:59
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak I took OP to mean they cast a mod attention flag "other"; I' be surprised one can flag as duplicate (in the technical sense) after one voted as duplicate (and the vote did not expire, but us pending or took effect). Also note the "mentioning the possible mistake made by the moderator" which makes sense in the context of an "other" flag yet not a duplicate flag. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 7 '16 at 14:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @quid Letting aside the specific case, talking in general: In the case of non-obvious duplicates I think that it would be advisable if the close voter explain in comments why the post is a duplicate. (Some reviewers do look at the comments.) Other possible action would be mention it in the dedicated chat room. And I'd guess that non-obvious duplicates would be ideal for the dedicated thread - creation of such thread was suggested not so long ago. I think that the actions mentioned... $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 14:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ...here would be preferable to flagging for moderators attention. (Or at least they are worth trying before flagging for mods attention.) $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 14:07
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak yes, I agree with all of this. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 7 '16 at 14:15
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @user26857 To me the statements that "one needs some knowledge and willingness to perceive why that question is a duplicate" and that there is "No need to explain anything in this case" seem to contradict each other. But as I mentioned, my comment was more about non-obvious duplicates in general rather than about this specific situation. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 14:42
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The point is that the current question also allows other answers that would not answer the dupe target. When the question is closed as dupe there is no place to give them. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 7 '16 at 14:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am not sure what the remark about minimal-ideals has to do with this question. I would suggest to take the discussion about tags where it belongs, so that we do not discuss here issues that are entirely unrelated to the original question. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Sep 7 '16 at 14:55
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ "If I were a mod, I would think the flag should be declined but since another mod already was on the question I might well leave it to this particular one." <- attempted to explain why this flag could take a while. Other than that I have a flag pending since more than a month on another site. I'd relax a bit. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 7 '16 at 15:08
12
$\begingroup$

"I was certain from the very beginning that my vote is a waste of time, since one needs some knowledge and willingness to perceive why that question is a duplicate, ..."

I'm willing to grant that Readers are lucky to have knowledgeable and willing experts such as yourself on this topic to spot the connection that is hidden to most of us. But would it not be more expeditious to post an Answer explaining the connection, rather than engage in a Close-as-Duplicate contest?

Closing as duplicate is intended to manage exact or nearly-exact duplicates, not cases where the answer to one Question is an essential tool to resolve another Question. Closing as duplicates aids in the Search process, and so helps Readers find information they seek. When some deduction is not obvious, it bears pointing out for the sake of future Readers.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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