Overuse of "possible duplicate" claim to evade or disqualify answers?

Question

I think some high-rep members overuse the "possible duplicate" claim and should be notified about it. "duplicate" means "duplicate", not merely related. I find that overuse to be unfair on responders who give or want to give nice answers and end up not posting them, or feeling that their answers have been to no avail or unjustly overlooked or underrated. In my opinion, that unjustified obsession with finding "(just in case) possible duplicates" evidences laziness on the part of some such members and even disrespect for members who are able to come up with a fine reply.

Here are a couple of examples:

1. Canadian English - How to relate duties to a job role

2. Do I have to put a comma before "in which" here?

Answer 1

A duplicate question is not necessarily identical: that would result in the questions being merged (so all the answers to both questions appear in one place, because all the answers are relevant in precisely the same way to both questions). Closure as a duplicate simply points to where an existing answer already covers what's being asked. This is made explicit in the banner at the top of the closed question:

which points to another question which answers the closed one. It's a subtle difference, but the difference is why there are two mechanisms. Merging questions doesn't happen very often, because it's not often that two questions are identical. It normally applies to one question being asked twice, either by the same person or by a bunch of classmates seeking help with schoolwork.

A question closed as a duplicate means that the linked question contains answers which may be applied to answer the closed question, in much the same way as a tutorial question is answered by the teaching material — some lateral thinking or application may be required.

If you believe that more explanation is needed, create a better answer on the question which is open, covering not only what is asked in that question but also a more general/complete answer which would mean less lateral thinking or application is needed for other questions linked to it. Because you are answering an old question, it will not gain as much attention as a new question, and you will accrue rep from it more slowly; but an answer will bump the question on the home page, and a good answer will gain rep regardless.

For your example 1, Canadian English - How to relate duties to a job role, the question itself is either fundamentally unclear or mere proofreading, "Is it correct?". The linked question provides the answer "Yes, it is correct, along with the alternative in which." That's not an incorrect link: it does answer the question asked.

In example 2, Do I have to put a comma before "in which" here?, you have provided a good answer which has [at the time of this post] a net score of +26. But Peter Shor's answer in the first link says exactly what you do, in a slightly different way: "Use a comma before non-restrictive clauses, and don't use a comma before restrictive clauses." So that's not an incorrect link either.