Well, let me give you what I had in mind as I formed the poll:
Two Captains both, separately plan a trip from the same marina to a new, same marina. This results in using the same track. ( Notice the "Same track" phrase in the question. )
It is almost always possible to avoid a decision given enough advance notice. I tried to avoid this with the simple phrase "your desire to pass". Thuis at whatever this distance is, you have determined that your action would be considered a "pass" rather than a distant event.
The "open waters" section is an attempt to avoid getting into Inland waters, Western rivers stuff. The question is straight up about passing, under "every day, normal, at sea passing".
The answers were intended to offer "3 and 4 are correct" as the most correct. However, I am not perfect, and now lean toward NC's "2 & 4 answer.
Of course, I worded 4 badly. For most recreational boaters, in common situations, unless there are additional things happening, VHF contact is usually not required. ie: no other traffic, no "common" turning points etc. In which case, a pass on the "simplest side" would be most appropriate.
Of course, if there is any doubt that this might be confusing or a problem for the lead vessel, then VHF contact should be made ( VHF ).
I might be wrong in my assessment of my own "test question". Which is, of course why we discuss these things. I do like the responses of both PascalG and NC the most.
---
Regarding the "distractors":
"Keep following" is essentially a space waster. Most folks noticed this.
"Sound horn with 5 rapid short toots, and pass rapidly on his port side." While there are horn signals that may be used to communicate the intent of the passing vessel and agreement of the vessel to be passed, "5 rapid toots" is definitely incorrect.
"Fire a white aerial flare then pass on his starboard side." Though incorrect, it is likely more correct than most believe. A white aerial flare may be used to imitate communications. In this instance, such a use would be rather extreme and rare, but it is not necessarily wrong. It is quite unconventional and would likely confuse the issue, but it might still be considered acceptable within the Rules.
I hope we all had the opportunity to learn a bit from the discussion.