That's clear! Adding links to previous threads is just a service to the curious. Not intended to imply dupiness. If it were a dupe we'd have downweighted it and probably marked it as [dupe] in the title.
Your link to the previous discussion was valuable, but I originally misunderstood the meaning. I've been reading HN long enough that I should know better.
However, for newbies (or the scatterbrained), perhaps you could prefix the link with something like: "For context, see discussion of earlier, related post: https://..."
I do that sometimes (see the search link upthread) but still haven't figured out the best way to word it. It would be nice to avoid being so repetitive.