From Kelly re 'Adds Nothing New'

[a_reader2003]

Regarding the use of "Adds Nothing New", I've been using it for 
several things.  
 
First, as you mentioned, for questions.  If the poster adds his or 
her own answer or opinion to the question, I categorize it 
accordingly, but if it's just a straightforward query , whether about 
canon or asking for theories, I put it in "Adds Nothing New" (the 
replies, of course, get categorized appropriately).
 
As far as  "Also use it selectively to ignore posts that repeat 
points that are frequently made", I'm usually pretty lenient 
regarding this point.  Even if I know a particular idea has been 
discussed ad nauseum, if the post is coherent and elaborates even a 
little, I will keep it in our database.  However, I come across a lot 
of posts that suggest an idea but fail to develop it, then are 
followed by other posts which address the idea more fully.  I try to 
look at it from our future users' perspective; if I were looking for 
past discussion of a theory or topic, would this post be at all 
helpful, or just an annoyance as I search for new ideas?  If the 
database is going to be effective, we don't want our users wading 
through tons of posts stating the same thing.  A bit arbitrary, I 
suppose, but that's my process.
 
I've been using "Adds nothing new" much less often recently, since 
posters are beginning to add slightly new angles to old theories, and 
starting to support their theories with canon.

Kelly