3

I saw a new question yesterday which was closed as duplicate, because there is another similar but different question where one answer also answers the new question. The relevant part of the answer is only a side note in my opinion and wasn't required to answer the old question.

I think that's not a valid duplicate, as it would still be a good answer for the old question if that part is removed and there might be better answers which focus on the new question.

But there are other opinions, therefore I'm a little bit confused. Is that a correct use case for the dupe hammer?

Example: Why SSL uses a third party (certificate authority) yet SSH does not (P.S.: I'm aware that it might be closed for another reason.)

| |
2

It can be, yes.

When a question is closed as dupe, it remains as a stub pointing at the duplicate, so anyone who hits the closed question when doing a search finds the other one automatically.

In this instance the answer seems very relevant and obvious, so I agreed with the flags and vote to close as dupe - and did the necessary.

The question doesn't have to be the same (although it can often help, obviously)

| |
  • That turn of phrase... so close to "do the needful"! :D – muru Jun 13 '16 at 15:34
  • I don't know that reference – Rory Alsop Jun 13 '16 at 21:57
  • "do the needful" is an Indian English phrase, often subject to some mockery. It's unusual to hear something like that written by anybody other than an Indian. For example, see: english.stackexchange.com/questions/43597/… – muru Jun 13 '16 at 22:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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