0

I have expanded the initial question by 1000% with detail and clarity and voted to reopen just now, which will soon expire! This is the second meta-thread about the [Streuselschnecke] (Streusel-Schnecke oder Schneck?) after the first one has resulted in a bunch of comments being deleted, including mine.

The essential question, as conventionally marked by a questionmark and an optionally rising pitch in your subvocalization, is trivial enough to understand and still standing. Nobody complained that it could be split in two questions about schnacken and Schnecke respectively.

Although it has been noted that the etymology of the zoonym Schnecke is easily looked up, thereby showing a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter. And it was noted that Snack had better been brought before ELU. Albeit, the secondary question about relative dating and cultural identification of broadly speaking German language material surely belongs at the German stack.

Hence I'm asking that the foreclosure be reconsidered and the reason reexamined as necessary. That's a stooped ideagibberish or spam as close reason – won't quite cut it because it isn't stupid if it works, isn't it?

On the other hand, what means do you have to moderate this situation other than possibly casting your vote!?

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .