### Communities

Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Post

# flagging as duplicate without any details shouldn't be allowed

+6
−0

I was reading this question. I was trying to flag something as duplicate. When I tried to flag as duplicate with no details, I got the message Thanks! A moderator will review your flag.

That may be a problem. It has to be fixed. Otherwise, a lot of people will troll with it. Eventually if codidact becomes big people can "troll" by closing question with themselves as the target As a comment says in this post. It won't be completely like trolling, but a moderator will be annoyed by having to review flags like that.

Why does this post require moderator attention?
Why should this post be closed?

# Comments on flagging as duplicate without any details shouldn't be allowed

manassehkatz‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

Agreed! I got those flags as moderator and couldn't figure out what they were referring to. Ideally a Duplicate Flag should require an actual target. But short of that (which would be complicated because the additional information for each type of flag would be different), a text field to fill in details (in this case, duplicate target) would make a huge difference.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

This is a bug. The duplicate close reason is supposed to require a link. I just checked the configuration here on meta and it's set to yes (required), but I was able to flag this as a dupe without supplying one. Thanks for the report.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 1 year ago:

Oh wait, I see what's going on -- if you close as a duplicate you have to supply a link, but if you flag you don't. That's an oversight. I don't know what it'll take to fix this. At the very least, we could add some text asking people to supply the link in the textbox.

deleted user wrote over 1 year ago:

@MonicaCellio i think there should a easy way to do it. if user selects duplicate than the text field can't be empty. Like it does when we select other. I will try to check the code(I am not a Ruby programmer that's why i always don't understand those codes). After looking at the source, I noticed community is taking Is a duplicate flag from database. And, It doesn't have for answer.

Skipping 1 deleted comment.