Timeline for Feature for Contesting a Duplicate Designation
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2013 at 8:22 | comment | added | Sathyajith Bhat Mod | @gravidThoughts the OS might be different, but the same steps/solution would be applicable to both. In such a case, it is deemed as duplicate. If you've tried the steps mentioned in the previous solution and they don't work - mention in the question - "solution xyz mentioned in linked question don't work because of <reasons>". To flag to reopen, click on the flag link under the question i.imgur.com/gnxAPzl.png | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 0:44 | comment | added | gravidThoughts | In my opinion, if an original poster has clear evidence that the question is not a duplicate, none of the mechanisms you describe solve the problem of an incorrectly marked duplicate as well as a formalized process for an OP to dispute. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 0:20 | comment | added | gravidThoughts | Also, if i flag to reopen, how do I provide evidence that the question is not duplicate? | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 0:14 | comment | added | gravidThoughts | I apologize for the original attitude, and have edited the post. Please Sathya, explain to me why it is a duplicate. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 0:12 | comment | added | gravidThoughts | Grammar lesson noted. I don't have 3k rep, but I am the original poster of the question. Disputing the designation of duplicate is a function of reputation? Maybe if someone besides the original poster wanted to intitiate a dispute. I don't think the question could be any clearer, it states windows 8.1 and even tags it that way. How do I flag to reopen? | |
| Dec 7, 2013 at 10:57 | comment | added | slhck Mod | Also it explicitly says below the question, "If those answers do not fully address your question, please edit this question to explain how it is different". Meta isn't mentioned there. | |
| Dec 7, 2013 at 4:16 | history | answered | Sathyajith BhatMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
