1
\$\begingroup\$

The question "Why do I have many duplicate files after importing a backup into Apple Aperture?" was put on hold as "unclear what you're asking". I don't know if it was later edited or if other readers just didn't understand, but the question is in the last sentence. The OP wrote:

So my question is: has anyone else had this problem, and are there any ideas on how to recover the photos in the Aperture Library without using Aperture or Photos?

I happen to know the answer and would really like to help this person, but am unable to. I don't have enough rep to cast a re-open vote, so I'm suggesting that other higher rep users please do so, if you're able.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It was edited after the comments were posted, and after the question was closed. \$\endgroup\$
    – scottbb Mod
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 3:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ OK, that makes sense. Thanks for the info! \$\endgroup\$
    – user1118321
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 3:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ =) I have nominated it for reopening. \$\endgroup\$
    – scottbb Mod
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 3:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks! It has been re-opened and I have posted an answer. \$\endgroup\$
    – user1118321
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 5:25

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5
\$\begingroup\$

As others mentioned, the question was added in an edit after the closure and was actually different from what I would have guessed prior to the question actually being asked directly instead of just an outline of the situation. I have re-opened it now that it has an actual question.

Also, as a general FYI, if you see something like this, feel free to just flag it for moderator attention as well. Especially if it was speedy closed (closed by a mod) for being unclear what they are asking and it is now clear, the reason was probably to prevent people from assuming the question and then answering the wrong thing.

It's generally considered bad form to edit a question in such a way that it makes existing answers irrelevant, so if people start answering a question before it's clear what it is, then editing the question to make it clear can become impossible without making answers no longer fit. That's why we may be aggressive at closing until the question is clear. We'll re-open when we see it is fixed, but mod flagging helps get to it faster if the community hasn't already gotten the re-open vote done.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the info. I had flagged something for re-open on a different stack exchange site and it was rejected with the comment that I shouldn't use flagging for that purpose. So that's why I didn't flag it. Color me confused! \$\endgroup\$
    – user1118321
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 5:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @user1118321 the key distinction is if moderators are already involved. If the community closes something a moderator is unlikely to reopen unless something is very wrong. If a moderator closed it though, then it's something we were planning on coming back to anyway. The idea is generally to let the community handle what it can, but moderators step in when either the community can't handle it or it needs to be handled quickly. \$\endgroup\$
    – AJ Henderson Mod
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 5:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ OK, that's good to know. Thank you for the explanation. \$\endgroup\$
    – user1118321
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 5:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ Put another way, if you think a moderator will want to take action, flag it for them. If it's something the community can do, flag with a community handled flag or comment. If a moderator took action and the reason is fixed, they'll want to know. It just isn't something for getting around the normal procedures. \$\endgroup\$
    – AJ Henderson Mod
    Commented Aug 10, 2017 at 5:35

You must log in to answer this question.

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