This question is an exact duplicate of:
EDIT: Why was this question marked as duplicate? Please do not vote for a duplicate if you did not take the time to read the posts. As I said in the comments, the difference between those two reasons is not mentioned on the alleged duplicate post.
This is a follow-up question on: Recent changes to close reasons on Stack Overflow.
I am honestly confused with the recent changes to the set of off-topic close reasons. Let me hasten to add that I welcome constructive changes and that I try to make an effort to flag a question with the correct close reason.
I have trouble to discern the following two close reasons:
This question appears to be off-topic because it lacks sufficient information to diagnose the problem. Describe your problem in more detail or include a minimal example in the question itself.
This question was caused by a problem that can no longer be reproduced or a simple typographical error. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers. This can often be avoided by identifying and closely inspecting the shortest program necessary to reproduce the problem before posting.
For starters, they both link to the same SO help page: http://stackoverflow.com/help/mcve. But there's more:
- What's the difference between "lacking sufficient information to diagnose the problem" and "a problem that can no longer be reproduced"?
- Both close reasons ask the OP to post or study a minimal code sample.
This is not about whether you like those close reasons, so please don't post your opinion. All I ask is:
- the rationale behind the above close reasons
- straightforward examples that clearly show when to use which close reason
Besides, I don't think I can grasp the wording here: "this one was resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers". Is this a close reason for problems that are already solved?