Subject Question: When is the "lock-in" point for the Diana Allers romance?

The above question was closed as duplicate of this one:

Can you romance multiple people?

My question is very specific, and even calls out the fact that generally the answer in the proposed duplicate is applicable. However, there is documentation that the specific case I'm referring to is unique in some ways - ways which may make the general answer not applicable.

So, could we re-open the subject question? Or will I need to post a bounty on the duplicate if I want anyone to be motivated towards specifically addressing this particular case?

If it will help, consider that the question could be effectively re-worded to be "Is there a 'lock-in' point for the Diana Allers romance?" or "When is the 'lock-in' point for the Diana Allers romance?" - something which is not well addressed (if at all) by the proposed duplicate - and achieve the same end.


To clarify my last point:

The proposed duplicate "Can you romance multiple people?" is exactly as its title says. That question can be simply answered with a "Yes/No" and needs little to no further elaboration.

My question is a little more than its title belies. (And perhaps I should edit the title a bit to better reflect this - that seems to happen a lot with my questions.) If one were to read the question instead of just the title it would be apparent, that I not only need to know whether I can romance multiple people when one of those is Diana Allers but also, I need to know when that relationship gets locked in. This level of detail is not necessary in the proposed duplicate, and is even going a bit too granular for the proposed duplicate's scope.

If we were to answer the proposed duplicate to include the details I need, it would also have to include the same details for every other character to cover the question's general scope. At that point, you're nearly covering the entire content of the Mass Effect 3 section in the Romance article on Mass Effect Wiki. Questions that are actually reaching for that much information though, are generally closed as Not A Real Question.


Question has been edited for clarification. Most of the original content is the same, but the title has been changed and a line has been added to specify I'm not looking for a multi-romance play-through. Please re-evaluate the question for re-opening.

  • 2
    I didn't vote to close your question, but the correct way of handling this would be to offer a bounty on the original question asking for specifics relating to Diana Allers, rather than opening a second question.
    – user27134
    Jan 17 '13 at 17:29
  • 3
    You wouldn't even necessarily have to offer a bounty. You could just leave a comment asking for clarification.
    – Niro
    Jan 17 '13 at 17:32

With your recent edit to the question I believe your question is now fine, and five other users seem to agree with me since it has since been re-opened.

I wasn't one of the closers, but your questions is a duplicate. A complete answer to the question Can you romance multiple people? should cover any special cases, including your Diana Allers example. Situations like this are why comments and bounties exist. Leave a comment on the accepted answer asking for a specific answer, and if that doesn't work you should consider adding a bounty.

  • What if the question was about something more obscure than Mass Effect? There's a very good chance that you'd get no response at all, leaving a comment asking for more.
    – GnomeSlice
    Jan 17 '13 at 17:49
  • 1
    @GnomeSlice Like I stated in my answer, if a comment doesn't work a bounty would be the next logical step.
    – Wipqozn Mod
    Jan 17 '13 at 17:52
  • 1
    I'm not certain that Diana Allers is a special case. (Special case, for the purposes of the proposed duplicate question, being where you could actually fully romance multiple people.) She may only be unique in that her lock-in point doesn't come until her final romance scene - something which would be out-of-scope for the proposed duplicate.
    – Iszi
    Jan 17 '13 at 18:07
  • 3
    Agreed with OP, "When do you confirm a monogamous relationship with X?" is not covered by "Can you pursue another relationship after entering a monogamous one?" The titles just weren't that clear. Jan 17 '13 at 19:52
  • 1
    I know that this will probably get drowned out in flames, but may I state for the record that I'm frankly sick and tired of "well this is why bounties exist!!!" being thrown around as a defense/short-circuit for bad answers? Especially when a cited duplicate is ridiculously old? Jan 20 '13 at 4:57
  • @RilgonArcsinh: If you feel that strongly about it, you should make a meta topic. We're well aware that the bounty system isn't perfect, and if you'd like to outline the issues and open up discussion for an alternative please do.
    – Wipqozn Mod
    Jan 20 '13 at 12:45
  • 2
    @Wipqozn I'm not going to bother because I know the outcome. I'm well aware that I'm dramatically in the minority for believing that "duplicates" that are either asking for an updated answer or a narrow sub-sect of a larger query aren't duplicates (or problematic) at all and find no merit in belaboring the point. Jan 20 '13 at 13:11
  • @RilgonArcsinh I'm not exactly clear I get what you mean by "defense/short-circuit for bad answers" - especially the answers part. You can't bounty answers. (I understand you don't want to rehash it, although it's hardly fair to blame others for a non constructive policy discussion if you give policy discussion such a non constructive start.)
    – badp
    Jan 20 '13 at 14:52
  • 2
    @badp "This answer doesn't answer my question and the question is too broad to really hit the crux of what I want, but if I ask what I want, it gets closed as a duplicate and told to 'just add a comment/bounty'." is basically what I mean. I don't foresee any change to that. Jan 20 '13 at 15:04

You must log in to answer this question.

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