So, this has nothing to do with the article itself and is instead about the HN post. This is a dupe of the exact same article posted 2 hours earlier. The URL i

So, this has nothing to do with the article itself and is instead about the HN post. This is a dupe of the exact same article posted 2 hours earlier. The URL is only different because this one, the dupe, had a # at the end of the URL and bypassed dupe detection. Why isn't that something that is identified and fixed automatically? Even better, if HN detects that someone is purposefully trying to bypass dupe detection, does HN punish that user? This case looks like it could have been a simple mistake, but there's zero reason that HN shouldn't be stripping a trailing # and in general having the dupe detection flag URLs that only differ in fragment ids.