Why this-1 was closed as a duplicate of this-2 which is already a duplicate of this-3.
Nested duplicates is not correct and doesn't make sense too. Everything should be closed as the duplicate of the first question, in this case, "this-3"
I would like to propose that we keep a record of users who earn the most points from questions eventually closed as "off-topic", "unclear," and even "duplicate", because today I've witnessed unbridled enthusiasm of users wanting to answer PSQ duplicates, already identified as a duplicate, yet subsequently chose to post another answer, anyway, (so long as they can get it submitted before the question is closed as a dupe, hoping their answer might be preserved in any possible merge.)
I think we need a board, akin to a "leader board", but keeping track of all the ill-gotten rep of the "usual suspects" for answering PSQ's and/or duplicates.
@CarlMummert I think we'd all like to keep a tally on that; unsurprisingly, it likely shadows current leaders on the "week", "month," and "year" "leader boards". Just the more glaringly obvious users: 20? I think a list (if I have to, I'll learn how to use "site analytics" to keep track of this, and link frequent updates.
@Holo I can work hard to learn how to use the site analytics to determine this. I'm pretty sure I can easily identify the most frequent "offenders" (I know four of them at this very moment I speak.)
@amWhy I have no idea even where can I find the site analytics! Also I can think on more than 4 but I am not sure if all of them would be at the "top" of the leader board
@Holo It is my understanding that at $20$K reputation, one becomes a trusted user, with access to moderator tools. Then one final tier later, at $25$K a user has access to site analytics. I've seen others use it. I think it's primarily a matter of learning the syntax and such, to use it. I will check around.
This also helps, but if we have new user that answered total of 10 questions and out of them 7 are closed it will be worth than a user that answered 100 and out of them 50 closed
I understand. I could understand an all-time list of ratios, as well as a monthly list. In your example the first would have a ratio of $\frac{7}{10} = 0.7 $ which is more telling that a user than has a ratio of $\frac {50}{100} = 0.5$. So I think measuring the ratio I've suggested, and measuring the same ratio within the previous month, would be helpful. The latter could help us "mediate" what could potentially become a long standing pattern.
I agree, @Holo, that the latter case in the two ratio's would be more problematic because it exposes an habitual pattern. But it would be could to better identify more recent usage (past month, say), to stage what has become known as "an intervention" to help users change their ways rather than become habitual PSQ answers.
@RushabhMehta Oh, sorry! I didn't mean anything I said in a patronizing way. I just don't like things to get so serious. Especially when I'm involved. But thanks for chiming in!
It would be great for someone who knows SQL and the StackExchange db schema to check that it actually does what it says. My SQL is not extremely great.
