in reply to Considering duplicates

It would help here if the links to the duplicates used the id:// format, as well, since a reason saying "duplicate of 42304" (number picked totally at random) just invites the considerers to "trust" the one who originally considered the node.

Just a couple of days ago, both a node and its duplicate were in the list to consider, and in the end prudence won out, leaving both to survive the voting (one with 4 keeps, the other with 2, I believe), leaving it up to a janitor to sort out the mess.

If we just, err, consider for a moment before considering a node, we'd do ourselves a great favor.