Suppose, question B is identified as duplicate of question A. Now user X answers B. It might be voted &/or accepted by OP of question B. If this is done knowing full well that post A has an answer already.
Is it fair practice to be followed by all?
Suppose, question B is identified as duplicate of question A. Now user X answers B. It might be voted &/or accepted by OP of question B. If this is done knowing full well that post A has an answer already.
Is it fair practice to be followed by all?
As noted in comments, you are discussing about following post:
does the soul go somewhere when we deep sleep?
This Qn is already answered in the linked duplicate within the Qn itself. If you see the original Qn and the new answer, they are mostly identical with respect to the scripture.
As soon as I saw the Qn, I linked with the duplicate. Despite that, the user decided to post an answer after 45 minutes!
This special scenario is already discussed in the main meta:
If another question/answer *perfectly* answers a question (but the question is quite different), is it appropriate to answer with just a link?
In a scenario where the questions aren't the same, but the new (potentially duplicate) question is solidly answered by the original question (and/or its answers), it would be appropriate to close as a duplicate. ...
Ethically if there is a repeat value in an answer, then it should be wiki-fied as soon as it's posted to disallow new reputation.
Since, here the answering user is also a moderator, we can't expect any action. But in case of the normal users, we should flag such posts.
BG 3.21 - Whatever a superior person does, another person does that very thing! Whatever he upholds as authority, an ordinary person follows that.