Bear with me on this, there's some TL;DR backstory.

I made this post (1) asking about the specific implementation of medal EXP awards and the stacking of said awards from Overwatch. I had previously seen this post (2) asking much the same thing, but my question had more parts to it that were not included in this second question.

A user comes in to tell me that my question (1) is a duplicate of the second link. I disagreed, saying that my question had other parts to it that were not answered. The user didn't seem to like this, claiming I was "ignoring their comments". Despite even editing my question to point out these differences, the duplicate flag remained.

The user then took it upon their self to edit the answer on the linked question (2) to include the answers to what I had asked, despite the question (2) not even asking about it. This user and another then cited that "the answer I was looking for was in the comments", which, at my own fault, I didn't read, but I hadn't realized that answers would be in the comments anyway.

My main question is, why are we ignoring the rule of "don't close a question as a duplicate if the linked question doesn't answer the original?" The user bypassed this rule, and edited the linked question/answer (2) to answer mine, and I want to know why.

I can make any clarification that's necessary, I understand it's a confusing series of events.

  • At the point you said that it was not a duplicate someone decided to improve the original question's answer. Regardless of the route taken, it seems that now your question is a duplicate. Or are you saying that the edited answer still doesn't answer your question?
    – user101016
    Oct 13, 2016 at 15:47
  • It seems that you have gone through this process: meta.gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/11996/…
    – user101016
    Oct 13, 2016 at 15:49
  • 2
    @camelCase Yeah, that seems about right, but it doesn't sit well with me. What's the point of Wipqozn's rule if we're just going to ignore it? Oct 13, 2016 at 15:57
  • 3
    You say the rule is ignored, but your question is currently closed as a duplicate of a question with all of the answers you are looking for. In that sense, it seems to be working well. Oct 13, 2016 at 15:58
  • 2
    I agree with murgatroid99. You haven't done anything wrong as you said that the linked question didn't help you. This resulted in your question being answered, the original question being improved (via a better answer) and we have a duplicate (which widens the scope for future users to find answers to similar questions).
    – user101016
    Oct 13, 2016 at 16:13
  • 3
    @murgatroid99 From the chain of events that took place, in the order they took place, my question was marked as a dupe before the linked answer was edited. Oct 13, 2016 at 16:43

2 Answers 2


Question 2 asks how much experience medals award. The answer edit in question says what the formula is for determining the total experience award from multiple medals. With or without your question 1, this edit fits the criteria for a good edit: it adds clarifying information to an existing answer without changing the meaning of the answer.

Once that edit was made, your question 1 was answered entirely by the answers to question 2, so the duplicate close votes are correct. Your question ended up pointing to a complete answer, so as far as I can see, the system worked.

  • 9
    The issue I have with this, though likely I'm blowing it way out of proportion, is that why ask questions when someone can just edit the answer on a related question and then close yours? While I firmly believe that closed questions are not bad questions, this is still a problematic situation.
    – Yuuki
    Oct 13, 2016 at 16:01
  • 1
    I would be in favour of the edit being a new answer completely, rather than amending someone else's answer
    – user101016
    Oct 13, 2016 at 16:09
  • @Yuuki You closed that question. Why did your position change since then? Oct 13, 2016 at 16:10
  • 8
    @murgatroid99 My position changed because I didn't realize that the other user in question had edited the answer in order to close the question as a duplicate.
    – Yuuki
    Oct 13, 2016 at 16:36
  • 7
    We have always held the position that expanding or retracting the scope of a question, when appropriate, is a Good Thing. But to be brutally honest, the scope was always there in this case, if somewhat vague in the beginning. That just makes the edits, which clarify the question, all the more reasonable.
    – MBraedley
    Oct 14, 2016 at 1:12
  • 2
    "why ask questions when someone can just edit the answer on a related question and then close yours" - surely you ask questions to get answers? It sounds like in this case an answer was received. Does it matter whether it was your question or another that is left open? It sounds like the edit to the answer was made as a result of your question so not asking wouldn't have achieved the same thing it sounds like...
    – Chris
    Oct 21, 2016 at 13:08

While I agree with murgatroid99's answer, I think you have very valid points that need discussing. The "system" has flaws, and we're constantly working on improving those systems as we grow. Obviously no system is perfect.

But the process in which this happened to you is not uncommon I would think. A lot of users I imagine never come to meta and don't even know about not closing a duplicate question if the original doesn't answer what the second question is asking. They just vote to close.

The "system" in place did end up working as it's intended in the end, but the events you describe are unfortunate. In a perfect world, enough users would have known not to close your question until the other one was edited.

I think there might be an idea here along the lines of another reason to reopen a question and bring some mods into the discussion based on new rules? I don't really know how often new reopen reasons are added, but I'm just trying to come up with something to help in the future.

  • 3
    They would have a point if was true that the original question didn't ask for this information. That's not true. It contained the text "how much experience do they reward?" since May.
    – DCShannon
    Oct 18, 2016 at 18:42

You must log in to answer this question.

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