7
$\begingroup$

There were two very similar posts on CV - this and the one it (almost) duplicates (at least, if you count the Q in comments, it's a duplicate). I marked the linked one as a duplicate and was in the process of answering the other, but some computer problems delayed my answer, which was then migrated (and my in-progress answer was lost in the migration, but I have since made a rough version of it in the migrated one).

The closed one clearly is on topic here, since it's a question about properties of forecasting time series.

Either one of two situations exist:

  1. The one I linked above really is a duplicate, in which case the thing it duplicates must also be on topic and so should never have been migrated

  2. It isn't a duplicate, in which case it should be reopened.

I believe the first applies (that the question in comments in the original post made it on topic, and at the same time made the second one a duplicate); however, picking either (1) or (2) is reasonable.

In respect of the post I linked above, as it stands currently the post it was closed as a duplicate of isn't a post on CV, so on what grounds is it a duplicate? It can only be a duplicate of the other one if the other one is brought back here.

It's possible it's a duplicate of another post, of course, but as it stands, something is wrong.

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ (+1) Usually the best way to rectify apparently inconsistent actions is to flag one of the threads for moderator attention. Those with sufficient reputation can supplement that with votes to reopen, close, delete, etc., which usually add the affected threads to user review queues. $\endgroup$ – whuber Nov 29 '14 at 14:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @whuber thanks - this sensible action didn't occur to me at the time. Sorry about that. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Nov 29 '14 at 21:56
7
$\begingroup$

This result is certainly inconsistent. But no system works perfectly. The migrated question definitely looks like an SO coding question to me. Even with the comments it is a little ambiguous that the real problem is the OP doesn't properly understand the concepts rather than the code. I can understand how it was migrated.

Actually, the closed-as-duplicate question sounds like more of an on-topic, conceptual question than the migrated one. In light of that, and since we have no control over getting the other one back, why not edit the duplicate and we can re-open it?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I agree and have just done that. (+1) $\endgroup$ – whuber Nov 29 '14 at 14:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @gung It would be unreasonable to expect it to be perfect; my own frequent errors remind me of that well enough. That such things happen so rarely is a testament to the moderators. I should have had the brains to flag it though. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Nov 29 '14 at 21:57

You must log in to answer this question.

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