I have basically this question. But that 2012 post doesn't work for multiple reasons:

  • The OP has forgotten to add good reasons legitimising his request. That lead to the usual avalanche of downvotes and "you don't want that" comments
  • Some detail is wrong (it says "NXDOMAIN" where it should be "empty NOERROR")
  • OP only rules out one of the non-working solutions that are suggested at various places in the web
  • I have another requirement that the OP might or might not have implied (Any solution should be non-permanent and configurable).
  • The accepted, upvoted and only answer is half rejecting the question altogether, and half giving a very unsatisfactory answer (replace a core library with a self-build)
  • The question is two years old. New solutions might have become available. More people might face the issue (IPv6 is enabled in more and more distros by default). But the presence of the accepted & upvoted rebuttal might discourage people from weighing in.

I would improve the question as follows:

  • Adding a number of good reasons why the question is relevant and valid.
  • Rule out 2 more non-working solutions that are suggested elsewhere
  • Improving title, tags and wording
  • Correct some technical detail
  • Adding my additional requirement
  • Hinting out two rough ideas how to maybe solve it

But improving the question would have some major disadvantages:

  • I would effectively re-write the question's text
  • Adding my additional requirement (non-permanent solution) would sort of change the question itself
  • It would still suffer from any downvotes it initially collected
  • The currently only answer would still be upvoted and marked as "accepted", even though its rebuttal of the question would become obsolete, and the included solution is highly unsatisfactory.

Basically, the chances of getting fresh answers to an improved old question are slim.

Given these circumstances: Would it be legitimate to post a "follow-up"? If yes: How can i make sure to not get closed as duplicate?

Edit: Thanks everyone who participated in the discussion. There seems to be a consensus that it is legitimate to post a new question if i avoid the XY problem by elaborating the issue i am trying to solve; if i state additional requirements; if i reference the old questions and explain the difference to them.

Here is the result. Not surprisingly, it already collected the first close-vote within minutes ... :-(

3 Answers 3


I remember that question.

The worst part of that particular question that you referenced was that the person who asked it refused to describe why he wanted to do what he was doing.

That's a problem, because it indicates the user has probably fallen into the XY problem trap.

There may actually be reasons why this particular solution might seem to be right, but without knowing the entire situation, it is impossible to say. For instance, a person might have thought of this as the solution to a bug in the firewall, where reconfiguring the firewall or updating its firmware would have been a better solution.

Instead of merely asking how to implement your "solution" (which might be a less than optimal solution) try focusing more on the problem you are facing, which led you to consider this solution.

  • I will do that. At the same time i want to allow people who try to implement Y for other reasons to find my question. Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 12:54
  • If "Y" is "cause the resolver to not send AAAA queries" then "other reasons" are probably wrong too. :) Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 12:57
  • Ah, there we go ... What about speeding up connection start by 50% where there is no IPv4 anyway? Yes, a local DNS cache would help, but disabling AAAA even more so, in particular where upstream DNS is laggy. Assume that i'd (re-)enable AAAA when/where IPv6 is available. Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 13:12
  • 3
    @NilsToedtmann You immediately solve the XY Problem when you mention X (that bit about the 50%, local cache, and all that). This is exactly what we're talking about. When you mention X and Y we might know a better Y and write an answer about that, or maybe Y doesn't even solve X. When you only mention your Y and leave out the X then you'll miss out on the better solution. Also this tends to crop up with weird and outlandish "Y" solutions, where the proposed solution runs upstream to all "normal" configurations and is likely to cause it's own problems.
    – Chris S
    Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 14:01
  • Cool. And mentioning X will be enough to spare me the 'closed-as-dupe' fate? Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 14:05
  • See my "direct" answer below.
    – Chris S
    Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 14:06
  • Thx. I updated my post with a link to my new question Commented Oct 1, 2014 at 9:29

Adding my additional requirement (non-permanent solution) would sort of change the question itself.

Yes, yes it would. In fact, that would make your question a different question, which should be asked separately.

It is, however, a related question, so your new question should also link to the existing question, along with a clear statement that the existing question is similar, but not the same. (I have seen people simply stating that an existing question is not the same. You should do more than that: make the differences very clear.)

Linking serves three purposes:

  • The link demonstrates that you have done your research.
  • The clear explanation of differences makes it less likely that another user will try to close your new question as a duplicate of the old one.
  • Some of the answers will overlap, so having a link helps the answerers. They can look at what research has already been done, and build on it.

That third bullet point may not be true in the case of this specific question, but it certainly is in general.


TL;DR Answers

Would it be legitimate to post a "follow-up"?

Yes, if you have a problem that is similar to a crap Question, ask a new question.

If yes: How can i make sure to not get closed as duplicate?

Capitalize "I" and reference the previous Question (mention explicitly why your question is different too)

  • 4
    Certainly the most sound advice is to Capitalize "I"
    – the-wabbit
    Commented Sep 30, 2014 at 15:32

You must log in to answer this question.

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