I noticed a question on which an interesting misunderstanding lead to inappropriate closure.
For the moment, let's think of a question as a chain of proposals linked together through reasoning. Only by addressing an important node in the chain can a question be answered (henceforth we refer this as "killing the question").
A: The Heisenberg uncertainty relation
B: There's a limit to the accuracy of physical measurements
X: A ---> B
C: not X
E: We should be able to observe large fluctuations by making precise measurements
D: C ---> E
We don't observe E, so by contrapositive, X is true, and so B is true.
The question boils down to asking whether D is true, even though the truth value of X is the one presented as the question. The question was then closed as a duplicate, but while the alleged duplicated questions, and the comments, address X or B, D was never addressed.
OP's follow up comment then want to tell the readers that none of the comments addressed D, however the comments that followed still only addressed X.
I think the typical fate of these questions is: D was overlooked, OP wants to clarify D, people lose patience for follow up questions and thus no extra response is given, question was effectively abandoned, result in dissatisfied OP.
That's all, just wanted to point out what I think is a somewhat common pattern of misunderstanding so we can all be aware of it.