Timeline for Repeatedly shown possible duplicate checkboxes on my question after dismissing it
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 7, 2022 at 18:28 | comment | added | Rob | @41686d6564standsw.Palestine These are closer duplicates: meta.stackexchange.com/q/345191/282094 meta.stackexchange.com/questions/343055/… | |
| Jun 7, 2022 at 16:22 | history | edited | Justin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 6 characters in body
|
| Jun 7, 2022 at 16:22 | comment | added | 41686d6564 | @Rob I don't think that's the same bug. In the linked question, the OP says that the message reappears every time they refresh the page. Here (and what I also noticed before), it reappears with each new close vote. | |
| Jun 7, 2022 at 16:16 | history | edited | Justin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 97 characters in body
|
| Jun 6, 2022 at 22:35 | comment | added | Rob | This is a reoccurring bug: meta.stackexchange.com/q/342500/282094 | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 19:05 | comment | added | 41686d6564 | Yes, I've experienced this a few times before. The message is re-shown with each new close vote (even if it's for the same dup-target) and most likely with flags too. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 19:03 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | It now sounds too messy and complicated for me. Anyway, it was only an idea=experiment. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:59 | comment | added | Laurel | It's not affected by the close queue idt because there used to be a third vote that happened after the vote from that review. So I think it would work on my linked question, at the expense of putting it back into the queue (though retracting it would probably take it out again?). Otherwise you would need to get some people to do a close vote party, since you're going to need more than one vote to replicate it here. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:51 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | I don't think voting to close the first question as a duplicate will work because the review was completed 22 hours ago in favour of keeping it open, so congratulations on that: meta.stackexchange.com/review/close/82945 | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:48 | comment | added | Laurel | Well you would need someone else to close vote to be able to prove much of anything with this question so I think it would be better to cast a vote on the other one (assuming you weren't one of the existing votes there). | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:45 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | No, I meant this new question/request/bug. If you edit and dismiss the warning, then the defect/anomaly is limited to that linked post. Of course I'll retract the close vote if you confirm the message disappears. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:44 | comment | added | Laurel | @Mari-LouAСлаваУкраїні My linked one? Sure, if you agree to retract the vote before someone else closes it, lol. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:42 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | meta.stackexchange.com/questions/250981/… Would you mind if I cast my vote to close your post as a duplicate? | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 18:39 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | The temptation is to vote to close this post as a duplicate, only to see if the behaviour you described is repeatable. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 17:20 | history | asked | Laurel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |