6

It's hard to phrase this since I'm doing it at another's behest. I suppose the question is, does When is the darkest time of day? warrant being a question separate from Does natural light affect sneaking?? Despite my protest at kotekzot's edit, I admit that it was worthy of being asked first. Lawton also makes a good point that the question as kotekzot has rephrased it may be a duplicate. The way that it isn't a duplicate is that it is not asking whether light affects sneaking but whether natural light fluctuates.

My excuse for if this post seems hastily written is because close votes are starting on the first question, so I feel pressured. I'm considering opening up another meta-question to tackle the "duplicate" accusation more directly.
I rephrased the title to be more general. These are terms that I came up with, so if anyone knows better technical terms, suggestions are welcome.

  • 1
    You posted literally the same thing in both questions. – user98085 Feb 11 '14 at 22:26
  • 4
    @FEichinger Look at the edit history. His original question was something different, and then kotekzot changed the title to be asking a different question. His original body was unclear and wordy, but they are two different questions. – Wipqozn Feb 11 '14 at 22:27
  • @Wipqozn The bodies are largely identical, and that's both his work. The only major difference is in the title. – user98085 Feb 11 '14 at 22:28
  • 2
    @FEichinger Which completely changes the question. His bodies need to be reworked, Ia gree, but it's clear the intent in both questions is differnet. In fact it seems the only reason he reasked his question is because of a user changing the intent of his original question. – Wipqozn Feb 11 '14 at 22:29
  • @Wipqozn I'm sorry, but no matter the intention or reasoning, posting the same question body is plain ridiculous. If the questions are vastly different, then that should be pointed out plain and clear, not with yet-another-altered-title. – user98085 Feb 11 '14 at 22:30
  • 4
    @FEichinger The body is identical because he's just re-asking his original question. Another user edited his title to his original question which completely changed what he was asking. Should he have rolled it back instead? Sure! When he made the new question should he have edited the body of the old one to refocus it? Sure! But neither of those are a reason to close a question as a duplicate when it's clear the user is trying to ask something different. That fits our "Not Clear What WE're Asking" reason, but not the duplicate one. – Wipqozn Feb 11 '14 at 22:43
  • I edited your question because it was very difficult to understand, in accordance with your response to my request for clarification. The new question is currently very succinct (although it is still about natural light as a function of time of day affecting sneaking), if the old question had been that way originally I wouldn't have had to edit it at all. – kotekzot Feb 13 '14 at 12:55
  • @kotekzot But you changed the intent of my question such that it was (and again is) considered a duplicate of another question. I'm writing off Wipqozn's decision to do the same as damage control relative to my new question asking my original question. I also grant that you were just trying to help. – NiteCyper Feb 13 '14 at 13:05
  • Then you could roll back my edit and clarify the question yourself in a way that you think is appropriate. Personally, I don't see a meaningful difference between the 2 question, as they are asking about the same thing using different words. – kotekzot Feb 13 '14 at 13:10
  • @kotekzot (1) I did that. (2) You're saying that asking "when is the darkest time of day" is the same as asking "does natural light affect detection"? How hot is coffee, usually? Does coffee possess the physical property known as temperature? These are different questions. One presupposes the affirmative of the other. – NiteCyper Feb 13 '14 at 13:18
  • @NiteCyper 1. And I haven't touched your question since, so I fail to see what the problem is. 2. Question titles need to be short and to the point, most people will correctly infer that "does light affect sneaking" is shorthand for "how does light affect sneaking". People try to provide helpful answers here, nobody would answer "does light affect sneaking" with "yes, it does". – kotekzot Feb 13 '14 at 13:24
  • (2) Analogously, "does coffee possess temperature" would probably not get the answer to "how hot coffee usually is". The answer to "does coffee possess temperature" would probably expound on coffee's existence as physical matter thus being subject to the phenomenon of thermal energy. In the same way, the answer to "does light affect sneaking" may expound upon the mechanics of sneaking, but not when, if it fluctuates, that a day is darkest. Excuse me that I don't hold out hope for MY question to be answered there (in a question which has already accepted an answer no less). – NiteCyper Feb 13 '14 at 13:49
9

Those are two separate questions. They may be related, but they are separate questions. When kotekzot edited your question he changed the intent of it, which isn't really how we do things here. However, I don't think you should have asked a new question for your original. You should have just rolled back the edit. If kotekzot edited it again then I'd suggest flagging it for moderator attention. A mod can lock the post, and tell kotekzot (and any other user) to not change the intent of a users question.

With that said, however, I believe the reason that kotekzot edited your question was because he misunderstood what you were asking. Your question body is very wordy and unclear, and in my opinion hard to read. Making your question more concise would be a good idea. Editing your questions to have different bodies is good as well, since it'll help make it more clear that you are indeed asking two separate questions.

  • Could I just leave it as it is, as a to-be-closed duplicate, and start a new one with a description that attempts to reduce as much ambiguity as possible? The close votes are really turning me off. – NiteCyper Feb 11 '14 at 22:34
  • 2
    @NiteCyper Re-asking your question again isn't the proper course of action. Instead just edit both of your questions to make it clear that you are asking two seperate questions. If your question Does get closed it can always be re-opened, and in fact I'll be first in line to re-open it. – Wipqozn Feb 11 '14 at 22:42
  • 1
    agree, as it stands right now I'm closing the original since its clearly a dupe, but if you reword it to the original intent I'll vto right away. The second question should be deleted outright. – l I Feb 11 '14 at 22:43
  • 1
    @z- He has edited his new question to make it clear they are not duplicates, and are asking separate things. – Wipqozn Feb 11 '14 at 22:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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