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.
closure-as-duplicate post notice is inaccurate
The question post "Drafting the Codidact Arbitration & Review Panel" is closed as a duplicate of the later "Second Iteration of Drafting the Codidact Arbitration & Review Panel" and has a notice on it:
closed as duplicate by luap42 on Aug 18, 2020 at 15:55
This question has been answered before. See: Second Iteration of Drafting the Codidact Arbitration & Review Panel
To my mind, at least, "before" sounds like the "Second Iteration of Drafting" question was answered before the "Drafting" question was asked. Or, at the very least, like it was answered before the "Drafting" question was closed. Neither of those is true.
I think the notice should say not "has been answered before" but "has been addressed elsewhere". This is more vague both as to timeline and as to whether or not the other question already has answers, which means it applies accurately to a broader of range of closureworthy questions; yet it is clear enough.
I'm marking this a bug because the current implementation is inaccurate or misleading.
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Maybe what we need here is some way to close a question as "superseded by" another question; not really a duplicate per se, but something that works similarly from a technical and user perspective, with different display strings in the UI and a different implied direction of causality.
That would allow handling precisely this case, and quite frankly, in my opinion would come in awfully handy especially on Metas at times, when an issue gets revisited at a later date.
We have an issue open to fix this in the code, but I recently realized that moderators can also fix it locally: the close reasons are editable. I've edited it here on Meta to say "This question has been addressed elsewhere".
Moderators, please consider backward compatibility when editing close reasons. Don't edit a reason into a completely different one, because the edit affects all questions that have already been closed, and disentangling it later would be hard. (The UI doesn't expose any edit history on close reasons, so if you see an old question with a now-inappropriate close reason, it'd take digging in the database to figure out when it happened.) You can always add new reasons and deactivate old ones. Things like this current use case -- clarifying the meaning of a close reason -- are why close reasons are editable at all. So please do edit to improve reasons, and please be careful not to break existing closures in the process.
0 comment threads
1 comment thread