As Rodrigo already noted, the 'sudden flood' was due to edits, in this case to add the tag to these posts. The issue of edit-bumping has already had some discussion, and the answer was to view via the question tab vs the home tab AND also select the "Newest" tab (rather than the "Active" tab) in the horizontal bar.
In most cases, the edit-bumper has good intentions with undesired consequences. The effect is short-lived, helps to index the site, and make it easier for members to follow areas of interest.
To the issue of closing and/or deleting - from 2016 -
Could we create a common answer to all those “is this a scam?” questions?
and the more recent June, 2019 -
Should we have canonical scam questions?
On viewing this recent one, and a comment on your answer there -
“Sugar daddy” seems to be the ultimate clickbait title phrase. But
honestly, the question is causing no problems. Yes, if you can find an
exact duplicate (which I don’t think would be too hard), feel free to
suggest it. And downvoting is certainly appropriate if you don’t like
the question. It is also very easy to ignore questions that don’t
interest you. But the site benefits from participation, and it is good
to see people participating on questions like this. I bet the HNQ is
what brought you here from your other sites, and we’d love to have
more users like you here.
I would be happy to have members look at the list of sugar-daddy questions and help quantify the attributes that can offer maybe 3-5 questions that are the target of a fair 'closed as duplicate of....'. In other words, a new question is closed as it is one of these cited. I'd imagine this would help throttle the new ones remaining open a bit. Still, there might be a new one that has some unique issue and stays.
The Frequently Answered Questions (by topic) was meant to help a bit with these issues. Both a place to see typical good questions, and to find ones that can be used to support the 'duplicate' vote. In this case, a sugar-daddy set of 3-5 questions can be added under the scam section. To Ben's point in his comment, I'd be very careful when voting to close, it needs to be done kindly, and in a way that lets the asker know that they are not being told to go away, but to read other examples of how we've helped others with similar concerns.