Timeline for Can we bump threads?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:04 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
|
|
| Aug 11, 2014 at 18:54 | history | edited | MokubaiMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Aug 11, 2014 at 17:48 | comment | added | Valmiky Arquissandas | Makes sense, and seems like a reasonable approach. Thanks! | |
| Aug 11, 2014 at 17:46 | vote | accept | Valmiky Arquissandas | ||
| Aug 11, 2014 at 17:45 | comment | added | Mokubai Mod | If you get a good answer then we could potentially close the duplicate as a duplicate of your question rather than the other way around. | |
| Aug 11, 2014 at 17:44 | comment | added | Mokubai Mod | If you can provide more information than the original question, are actively going to respond to people asking you about it, and you can point to the original which has obviously been abandoned then I, for one, am fine with a duplicate. Point out in your question that you saw the abandoned question but you can provide X, Y and Z extra information that sets it apart. Be forthcoming and open and say that while it is a duplicate you can put more work into making it its own question. If you can provide absolutely nothing of extra value, then yes, bounty it. | |
| Aug 11, 2014 at 17:40 | comment | added | Valmiky Arquissandas | I'll ask the same I asked Journeyman Geek: What if I find a question in Google, that has no answers? Maybe it's not worth to bounty it; I shouldn't edit the OP's question for my own needs, and asking it again is creating a duplicate thread. Bounties are the only solution? | |
| Aug 11, 2014 at 17:35 | history | answered | MokubaiMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |