4 ms·
Your link [2] came 1 hour before your link [1]. Don't think there's anything malicious going on there, they just marked the one that came later as a dupe.
by philbarr 9y ago
Your link [2] came 1 hour before your link [1]. Don't think there's anything malicious going on there, they just marked the one that came later as a dupe.
- peller 9y agoThe news on this broke yesterday evening, and at one point both threads were on the front page. In my opinion the time to mark one as a dupe of the other was then, not 12 hours later. Especially in light of the fact that the 2nd comment on the now-marked-dupe post was a link to the earlier discussion, and in spite of that, discussion gravitated to the submission linking to github over the one linking to facebook's PR response.
- hobofan 9y agoEven if it's not malicious, that policy should be reconsidered then, because it can make interesting front page discussions just disappear.
- wongarsu 9y agoIf marking something as a dupe would transfer points to the duped thread I would agree. I would also agree if it was marked as a dupe within a reasonable amount of time. But marking a popular, 12 hour old thread as a dupe of a marginally older, unpopular thread and giving it the ranking of the unpopular thread feels wrong and doesn't respect the intent the community has expressed by voting.
- philbarr 9y agoThis seems a reasonable argument, and I think the mods should adopt your idea of transferring the points to the duped thread (and possibly the comments?)
- walterbell 9y agoAnd the post ranking!
- loceng 9y agoI assume points being transferred would cover the post ranking.
- walterbell 9y agoThe ranking is based on arrival rate of points, ratio of comments, total points, and other factors including manual moderator boost or demotion.