I had a bug report closed as a duplicate of a similar discussion. The similar discussion was just that - it was tagged as and offered no solution. The bug report cited a confirmation with a diamond moderator, re-framed the problem, and then offered a few solutions to the problem. And it created an actionable item for the site to act upon by tagging with .

Now that the question is closed, what will happen? Will the site still get the bug report and act upon it? Will the related discussion be promoted to a bug report since a diamond mod acknowledged it was a bug and the the community decided it was a duplicate? Or will the bug report be disregarded?

How should we proceed? Or what should be done next?

So things are clear: this is not a veiled request to reopen the bug report. I'm fine with it being closed as long as the problem is fixed. This is a question on expected outcomes based on events surrounding the bug report, and procedures to ensure the problem gets fixed.

Because it's not a veiled request, I did not even bother referencing the original bug report. This question is about outcomes and procedures.

  • I think Servy said it best: "Basically all meta questions are discussions".
    – hichris123
    May 11 '15 at 1:37
  • So how do we report the bug then? And how do we ensure its gets fixed (or declined)?
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 1:57
  • 2
    It has been quite some time since you last submitted a bug here - can you turn "a bug report" at the beginning of your question into a link to the bug report of concern, please?
    – PolyGeo
    May 11 '15 at 2:06
  • "...diamond mod acknowledged it was a bug..." Really? meta.stackoverflow.com/a/293919/1947286
    – apaul
    May 11 '15 at 2:09
  • 3
    meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/293920/… is a feature-request mistagged as a bug, this is why tags are not honoured in cases
    – random
    May 11 '15 at 2:43
  • @apaul34208 - I'm pretty sure missing a requirement and subsequent misuse ("i.e., "something overlooked") is a bug, not a feature. Here's how MSE describes it: "... a reproducible problem on the site that you believe is due to a mistake, malfunction, or programming error". How would you classify it? (Don't bother answering if you work for Apple or Microsoft because we already know the answer...).
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 3:14
  • @PolyGeo - yes, Please restrict the use of stack-snippets. I did not reference it because I wanted to avoid cross-pollination. That is, I was interested in the work flow related to the subject matter in this question; and not the specific problem detailed in the other question.
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 3:17

This tag indicates a reproducible problem on the site that you believe is due to a mistake, malfunction, or programming error.

This tag is for proposals of new features on the Stack Exchange network, or requests for a change to an existing feature.

A feature that you believe was mistakenly not implemented does not indicate a bug. If you would like to see a feature added make a feature request.

  • So its clear: the feature exists already. The feature was not implemented correctly. So Its not clear to me how a broken feature is itself a feature request, and not a bug. Especially since its runs afoul with the site's definition of bug. Can you explain it to dull folks like me?
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 16:31
  • Feature missing = feature request. Feature broken = bug.
    – apaul
    May 11 '15 at 16:37
  • Perfect, thanks. Then its a bug (if I am reading your response correctly). So this goes to the heart of the procedure question asked above: the discussions were misclassified (and remain so). The bug report was classified correctly but now its closed. So what are the steps to (1) ensure the site has an accurate report; (2) ensure the site has an actionable item; and (3) ensure the bug is fixed (or declined)? That's what this question is about...
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 16:42
  • @jww Are you requesting a that a feature be added to Stack Snippet, or do you believe that the SE developers had intended to block certain languages and failed to do so?
    – apaul
    May 11 '15 at 16:49
  • No, I don't want the stack-snippet feature added (it already exists); and I don't want a feature added to stack-snippet (its features are fine). I'd like to ensure the buggy implementation of stack-snippets be fixed. Its not clear to me that's going to occur based on the events surrounding the bug report. Hence the reason I am asking about the outcomes and procedures.
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 16:54
  • 2
    @jww Something being implemented differently from the way you would like it to be isn't buggy. Something implemented differently than the author's intended is buggy. You just wanting a feature to function differently than SE does, is a feature request, specifically the feature to restrict stack snippets from being allowed in certain places. If you want that feature to be considered, you can propose a feature request for it.
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 17:32
  • @Servy - "Something implemented differently than the author's intended is buggy..." - right. Please see Amunission's acknowledgement that it was not implemented correctly. Which leads me to: what are we discussing here? Are we discussing the "expected outcome and procedures" as asked in the question? Or are we rehashing this same irrelevant points, like when a bug is not a bug because X wants to disregard the site's definition of a bug and argue otherwise? Why is it so difficult to keep discussions focused and on-topic? This is a pandemic problem here.
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 17:39
  • 1
    @jww animuson didn't that the feature was intended to be implemented as you would like to be but that implementation is malfunctioning, so your assertion that he is claiming it's not working as intended is just wrong; he said that the way SE implements things isn't always ideal, so if you see how an implementation could be improved from SE's original design, you can propose a feature request to discuss it. His answer is completely in line with my last comment.
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 17:46
  • @jww As for us not discussing the issue, the issue is you posted a feature request as a bug report, and it was closed as a duplicate of a discussion and a feature request, which you have a problem with as they weren't bug reports. As for a resolution, it's simple, retag the feature request that was mistagged as a bug request to a feature request; problem solved.
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 17:50
  • @Sevy, here we go again... "the issue is you posted a feature request as a bug report..." - no, its not. It meets the definition of a bug according to the site. And Amunission stated it was overlooked and a bug in the implementation. If you feel the definition of a bug is not correct, then you should petition to change it. If you feel its not a bug, then you should take it up at the question that probed these issues. That's a separate question I asked to ensure I understood what was going on. And stop wasting time on this thread. What is the major malfunction in keeping things on-topic???
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 18:24
  • 2
    @jww No, it doesn't meet the site's definition of a bug. The feature is not malfunctioning. It's working as it was designed to work. Animuson (Is it really that hard to spell his name properly, or mine, for that matter?) did not say that the functionality is a bug. He said that the implementations of features always have room for improvement, so if you would like to propose new features to improve the site's functionality, you can. How can you possibly interpret that as him acknowledging that the implementation isn't functioning as it's intended?
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 18:56
  • 1
    @jww The fact that you don't like the response to your question doesn't make it off topic. You were asking what to do about a situation where a feature request was closed as a duplicate of another feature request (where both were requesting the same feature) and where the duplicate question was mis-tagged as a bug. The resolution to that problem, as you've been told, is to not mis-tag the bug as a feature request (or to ignore the incorrect tag, if you really want). The fact that you don't like that doesn't make it off topic.
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 18:58
  • @Servy - "The fact that you don't like the response to your question doesn't make it off topic" - I'm very satisfied the policy is not/was not in place and its a site mistake. I don't know why you insist on claiming its a feature request. God, I hope I never use any software you develop... Legitimate bugs closed as feature request.... Sigh....
    – user173448
    May 11 '15 at 20:21
  • @jww Even though you've been told the oppose by literally everyone you've interacted with, including those in a position to comment specifically on the intentions of the design of the feature? So, what, you think they were just lying when they said that the feature is working as designed? It seems like you're someone who defines a "bug" as "A feature that I personally would want implemented" and a "feature request" as "a feature that I personally wouldn't want implemented"; that's just not how others use those terms.
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 20:27
  • 1
    @jww You mean the question that specifically told you it wasn't a bug, that if you wanted the feature added you should post a feature request, and that you've completely disregarded and pretended it has validated the bug anyway because... (and this is where I'm failing, can you help me out here with why you're ignoring everything the answer is saying and assuming it's saying the opposite of what it's actually saying, because I'm just not seeing it?)
    – Servy
    May 11 '15 at 20:46

You must log in to answer this question.