I asked  to get a constructive response to the problem on how to get a host name for a client VM known to the host.  Another user then came by and closed as duplicate. Being a gold badge holder this took effect immediately. I suspect they did so without understanding the question fully.  Now I've tried to reopen and call moderator attention to this question, so I can get an actual response perhaps even a useful answer, but without prevail.  How should I approach this from here?    EDIT:  The duplicate has been removed, without me getting to editing the question as suggested.
121220
I have a question on Super User that was closed as an exact duplicate. In my opinion this is in error, the other question is similar in that they both revolve around the presence or lack of the same feature however the two questions approach the feature from distinct use cases. At present the answer to the two questions IS the same, however in time, because their purposes differ, a third party solution could arrive to one or the other which does not solve both use cases. Having one question closed prevents it being (potentially) answered.  Admittedly, in the initial versions of the question was not worded so the differences were apparent, so it was valid to close it. Now it has been revised so the differences are clear. Adding a comment or editing and old question doesn't get fresh eyes on it, no front page exposure. So what does one do? Ask a question like this here on meta? Ask the question anew with the better phrasing?  There is another meta question asking about this, , but the theme is quite different, being about appealing a closure in the milieu of flame wars and off-topic debates.
14565
My reputation rating on SO took this hit an hour ago, and it is due to what appears to be the simultaneous deletion of multiple questions.  I am uncertain why it happened, am concerned, and would appreciate an explanation.  Going to  shows that it was removed due to moderation.  Was a script run deliberately, or were we hit with a question deletion attack; what happened?  -12     today -2  1 hour ago  removed     How to send a 2d Vector over UDP in c++ -2  1 hour ago  removed     How do I use the Eclipse debugger to debug a Java application? -2  1 hour ago  removed     PHP string error; inconsistency with local and server -2  1 hour ago  removed     Unable to start the MySQL service after a server migration -2  1 hour ago  removed     How to use Java to print a text file on a ticket printer? -2  1 hour ago  removed     How can all of the ZBrush Obj files be imported to make a complete model?
82656
This happened to me twice. Someone flags my question as duplicated and only when I visit the question I notice the comment. Before I had no proof, but today I have *evil laughter*.  This is the notifications:        I count 4, remember this number.        Lets see... umm... 1, 2, 3... 5! HA! So, there are 5 comments and one of them (the one that flagged the question as dupe) didn't get into my inbox. So, is this by design or I really should get notified?  If this is by-design, I disagree.  Note to self: I suspect other canned comments doesn't reach the OP, like the custom close reason.
94449
I asked this in the tavern. I need to ask a question anonymously as my profile is pretty much traceable to me.  I've been told that logging out and asking the question will do. However I'm worried that when I log in again the question will be re-associated with my account.    I'm not worried about reputation but more that it reflects on people in real life I know indirectly and I don't want to offend them.  Is it sufficient to just log out and ask the question?  Edit 1: clarification added in comments. I don't think any of the people concerned are members of these sites but they are readers. What I wouldn't like is for someone to see a situation similar to the one they're in, combined with my username, my email address on my profile, my location. Pretty much means that if someone were to see the question they'd know it was about them. That's what I don't want.  Edit 2: Morality I want to make it clear if this is against the rules I won't do it. I'm quite happy to let the mods know it was me who made the post. I won't be upvoting it either.  You've all been great telling me How to do this but just like Kragen I'd like an official nod to go ahead. I don't know whether this behaviour is bannable, discouraged, encouraged (as I'm trying to prevent hurting people's feelings) or otherwise.  Secondly I'm not worried about them trying to track me down, just an accidental spot. So long as it doesn't have my username, which let's face it would be recognised directly connected to the post, I'm happy.
55514
I'm out of close votes again today. But I still have 100 flags. How do the mods feel about me flagging questions for closure, even though I would be able to VtC myself, if I weren't already out of votes?  Related: How do the mods feel about me flagging a question for closure (a super obvious code-dump, for example), even if I have CVs remaining, in an attempt to preserve my close votes for less clear cut close decisions?
119930
As of a few minutes ago, if you have a gold tag-badge for a tag associated with a question that's been closed as a duplicate, you can edit the duplicate links to replace, add, remove or re-arrange them:    These changes are tracked in PostHistory to allow anyone to detect abuse, while the results update the PostLinks table so that existing logic continues to work (I mention this because some of you may wish to lean on  for observing how this works out, once it gets updated). Rationale This has been requested for... . In February of 2013, Jarrod replaced the venerable but messy method of marking duplicates by editing links into the top of the post with a system that records the question IDs in a separate table and renders them as needed. This was a huge improvement... Not only did it make tracking the usage of duplicates much easier and more reliable, it also prevented editors from inadvertently (or intentionally...) editing out the duplicate links without reopening the question. But it also , which was useful in cases where more than one duplicate was appropriate (for instance, &quot;too broad&quot; questions that consist of multiple questions, each already answered) or situations where the asker clarified their problem and a different duplicate link became appropriate. This was clearly not ideal; some folks resorted to reopening and re-closing, while others  to work around the deficiency. Today, that changes. Oded stepped up to implement an elegant solution: allow  to also modify the list at will. This stops short of fully restoring the previous capabilities - after all, there were serious downsides to that. But it should suffice to allow those most familiar with a given topic to better curate it. Please report any bugs you find, tagging them  . Enjoy!
33889
I have asked  which I don't honestly think is a duplicate of the question linked as motivation for closing. They are both about java, but one is about the language and the other one about its applications in the real world. They are sure related but not exact duplicates by any means. Yet it took just a few minutes to find 5 people willing to close it.  Why is it so? Do similar questions really pollute SO so much? Is closing a question like that so urgent that you can't leave it open for a while and see if it meets interest in the community? Do people just do it because they have the power to do so and they like to use it?  SO should be a community site about programming, not about who's the quickest sheriff.  EDIT: edited subject as I meant "close" instead of "delete"
100844
on Ask Different appears to have no name due to invisible Unicode characters:    he's the #2 user on the site:    Why is that allowed? I think it is confusing for users, e.g. when they will see at the bottom of an answer:    It's not clear who answered, not clear what the rep numbers and badges are related to, and not clear how you can @reply to that user in the comments!
23041
If I were in danger of being banned from asking questions, I'd be advised:     ... Also, edit your previous questions to improve formatting and clarity.   It happened to me, very recently. At the time, I only had three questions here on Meta SE. To quote Shog:     That's one positively-received question, followed by two duplicates - the last downvoted and deleted.   How do I improve a question marked as a duplicate?   Rewrite it to something else? Maybe that's gaming the system but at least its a way out. Rewrite it so that it is better than its predecessor? At least then it can maybe serve as a useful landing spot for a search engine result where the search terms matched it rather than the original. Get into the time machine, go back to just before posting the duplicate, do a better job of searching for alternate wordings of the question, then not post it? The only problem being, the Stack Exchange's search engine is, how to put it, far from perfect. Oh yes, and the time machine thing. Forget about it improving "duplicates" -- focus on improving deleted questions instead? How do I manage that?   Please, rethink the way you handle question banning warnings.
70946
Today I saw "", realized it was a duplicate and voted to close it.  I then saw in the comments that I had voted to close it four days ago!  How did that happen? There were no close votes listed at all, and I was permitted to vote to close it today!
58173
If you    Formulate a question vaguely It gets closed / put on hold for this You take the comments to heart and reformulate it It no longer gets attention but you have not enough reputation to trigger a reopen.   Then is there anything you can do? Is closing the question and stating it as a new question a legitimate solution? I have the feeling it is not, but did not find any info here on meta.
54537
The question by  got me thinking. This has been raised on , but has been declined. Would someone with lesser rep or a less famous name have received the same number of votes/answers as Joel? I know the question was briefly closed, but it got reopened when the intent was made public. I think someone did try it, but I don't think their question was suitable for the experiment and it was soon closed. Similarly, do answers by Jon Skeet and others with &gt; 20K rep garner more votes than equally correct answers by others less notable? Is this because of their name, their rep, or the fact that the answer is correct? I would hope it's the latter, but perhaps we ought to find out. I wonder if the following experiment would yield any useful information: If Jon created a second account under a pseudonym and posted a few answers along side slightly &quot;worse&quot; answers credited to Jon so we can see which ones garner the most votes. Another experiment (though this would require a change to SO) could be to hide the identity of the poster for a period (a day?) but leave the (approximate) rep score visible. This might show whether people were using the rep as a guide. On a personal note, if there are two equally correct answers I tend to award my up-vote to the one with the lowest rep score - to spread &quot;the love&quot; around (so to speak). NOTE I'm not saying that questions and answers should be permanently anonymous, or that there shouldn't be a way of finding out the identity of a poster straight away. I just feel that the question or answer should be judged on its own merits rather than the perceived merit of the poster.
33928
I just , which had been closed as  a duplicate of another.  I navigated away and went to visit the page later, it turns out, the Possible Duplicate banner wasn't removed automatically.        How come?
75727
I keep seeing custom flags in the queue from question askers who are incredibly irritated because there is a big, prominent box at the top of their question. It's just a list of other questions which may have the answer they desire, and is only even displayed to them because the question is not closed yet.  This question may already have an answer here: [list]  But to an ordinary user, it is not at all clear that the box is only shown to them, or that it will go away on its own if their question never actually gets closed. Could the text for this notice be altered to make it more clear that:  They are just suggestions for the person to view. Potentially if they agree with one, they should vote to close their own question as a duplicate of it.  Their question is not closed yet. If they disagree with the duplicates suggested, they should clarify their question and explain why it's not a duplicate.   I was thinking of an altered wording such as:  You might be able to find an answer to your question here: [list] If those answers do not fully address your question, please [edit your question] to clarify your exact problem.  I went with a more direct wording for the bolded title. Since the notice is only displayed to the asker, it makes more sense to talk directly to them in the message rather than making it feel like it's supposed to be addressing the entire audience of the site. Emphasize that only that person is seeing it by talking to them. It would also be helpful to append a &quot;More info&quot; link at the end of the message that links them to some further documentation about duplicates, and explains how the notice works - particularly that it will go away eventually or change to a proper duplicate notice if the question does get closed.
61122
Earlier today, I marked a question on Stack Overflow as a duplicate. Then I waited about 5-10 minutes and it showed 5 people. However, my name wasn't included.  I also remember that the question that was linked on top was the same question that I selected.  Now I'm not trying to ask for the "spotlight" but I just want to know how does this naming system work? Do they go in order or do they go by reputation?
55491
It's been more than a month since I have started using . It has these users with user names in the format of "user-random number". I have observed them in some of the stack activities, most of the time asking questions.   Does the moderators create them for their own purpose. If yes what purpose do they serve?   I mean a user is free to have any user name. But it's just a hunch that such users are actually moderators. I may be wrong; just need some clarification.
48874
What is the reasoning behind the design decision to allow users to create a display name which matches another existing users exactly?    This is opposed to the common practice of enforcing unique user names, and I'd really like to learn something.