Two questions were recently asked, each looking for the opposing view of the other. The original question is currently open, while the second has been put on hold for being "too broad".

The original, asks why somebody working for a sole employer for 15 years is not a "red-flag" in recruitment:

Why is working on the same position for more than 15 years not a red flag?

Soon after, a second question asks the opposing side of the question - why somebody working for a sole employer for 15 years is a "red-flag" in recruitment. This has now been put on hold for being "too broad":

In what ways could someone working at a position for 15 years be negatively perceived?

There is not a particularly huge amount of information in the first question that seems to make it more specific (other than potentially that they have added that the interviewee is a software-engineer).

I am currently not clear of the ways the second question fails to meet the on-topic criteria, where the first does.

In what ways is the second question "more broad" than the first (to the point it needs closed) - and what additional information would be required in this kind of situation?

  • 2
    I see no difference in broadness. Feb 28, 2019 at 17:00
  • one reopen vote Feb 28, 2019 at 17:12
  • In my mind, I see these as both broad and open to a dash of opinion.
    – Neo
    Feb 28, 2019 at 18:47
  • 1
    FWIW, the second post is open again now
    – DarkCygnus Mod
    Mar 1, 2019 at 23:26

1 Answer 1


IMO, if anything, it should have been closed as a duplicate.

Failing that, both are a bit broad, but I think the first one irked enough people to stay open. It's a post people loved to hate.

You must log in to answer this question.