2

Recently I have found a question which I believe is wrongly marked as a duplicate of another one.

The other question looks very similar and partially addresses the issues raised by the current question. So at first glance the current question may pass as a duplicate. But I still believe it is not to be judged as a duplicate after a thorough inspection.

Is there a way to remove this duplicate flag? What are possible options I, a user with pretty low reputation, can try to revert the question's status?

What I have already tried

I raised an "in need of moderator intervention" flag and tried to explain the situation thoroughly along with two screenshots within the 500 character limit. The flag was reviewed and its status changed to "helpful". But the question in question is still marked as a duplicate of the other.


Current issue

By default alt+tab in GNOME cycles through

  • open applications (instead of individual windows)
  • from all the workspaces (instead of only the current one)

One needs to press key to show individual windows of the same application, see this screenshot:

https://i.imgur.com/6kXM2fn.png

In this question in question OP asks for a way to change both the behaviours, i.e. they want to make alt+tab cycle through individual windows instead of applications only in current workspace. The other question only deals with the "only in current workspace" part and doesn't touch upon "individual windows instead of applications" part at all. If the fixes from the other question are applied, alt+tab will still cycle through open applications (instead of individual windows) but now only in the current workspace.

Screenshot of my "in need of moderator intervention" flag:
enter image description here

marked as duplicate by pomsky, Community Jul 1 '18 at 21:03

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • @pomsky probably a temporary issue with imgur... – Thomas Ward Oct 9 '17 at 15:18
  • 4
    @pomsky Thanks. Btw, as one of the close voters there, I will say that not only does linking the question not offend me, but the exact opposite: If a closure is correct, you give people an opportunity to defend it. If a closure is wrong (as this one looks to be--I'll likely vote to reopen soon), you protect us from causing further harm and also give us the opportunity to cast reopen votes. Of course, it is also possible for someone to wrongly change their mind about a good close vote or defend a bad one, but the point remains that you are only giving us opportunities, not taking them away. – Eliah Kagan Oct 9 '17 at 15:31
  • No need to keep updating your question to explain yourself, we understand and this is exactly what Meta is for, disscusion of the main site. Your disclaimer and update are not needed. – Mark Kirby Oct 9 '17 at 19:56
  • @MarkKirby Thanks! I've removed them. – pomsky Oct 9 '17 at 20:34

Browse other questions tagged .