I posted the same thing on stackoverflow recently.
It seems it needs to be posted here too.

The problem is that you flag some content that is "flaggable" then the poster edits the post and your flag is incorrect and handled as incorrect.
This means you get an declined flag even though your flag was correct at the time you placed it.

Either mods have to look carefully for edits, or flags need to "die" after an edit, or the flagger get a notification and the possibility to retract the flag (on all types of content).

Link to related meta topic on SO: https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/384604/flagging-content-and-then-its-edited

Link to post I got a declined flag: https://superuser.com/posts/1441651/revisions
The first revision is in my opinion not an answer

Regarding low quality as an option:

(Click to expand)

  • 2
    I believe mods here do look at the history and don't just blindly decline flags based only on its current form. The example you linked to was an answer. It was a terrible answer that deserved a downvote in its original form, but technically it was an answer. That flag would have been declined even if the person who answered it didn't edit it with additional content. Do you have another example of a real "not an answer" that you flagged that was later edited and your flag was declined? – n8te May 30 '19 at 8:11
  • @n8te not on superuser. But reading the NAA text it says: It should possibly be an edit, a comment, another question, or deleted altogether.. That is a comment in my opinion. One single line of nothing really is a comment. It's not a partial answer. A partial answer would be make your own browser, you can read this documention on how to build your own browser [link] . It's not a good partial answer, but it is a partial answer. – Andreas May 30 '19 at 8:16
  • 1
    The consensus seems to be that NAA flag should only be used on posts that make no attempt whatsoever to answer the question. Like when a drive-by user shows up from a google search and asks their own question on someone else's post. Or someone who posts gibberish. "You can't" is technically an answer by the loosest definition of the term. It definitely would have deserved downvotes and maybe even deletion for low quality had it not been edited, but I still think it doesn't fall under NAA. – n8te May 30 '19 at 8:21
  • Don't get me wrong, I also think it would have been more appropriate for an answer like that to be posted as a comment instead of an answer, which is why I would have downvoted it, but from what I've read on numerous meta posts I think the NAA flag still doesn't apply to it. – n8te May 30 '19 at 8:25
  • @n8te low quality??? And where is that flag? Have you looked at the flag options lately? Spam, rude or abusive, NAA, in need of moderator. That is the options you got. There is no low quality anymore, it had been removed. Don't get me wrong, I also think it would have been more appropriate for an answer like that to be posted as a comment instead of an answer then why not flag that you think it should be a comment? – Andreas May 30 '19 at 8:25
  • It still exists. I just checked now. "Very Low Quality - This answer has severe formatting or content problems. This answer is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed. " – n8te May 30 '19 at 8:26
  • See image in question – Andreas May 30 '19 at 8:28
  • Maybe not on the mobile version? I don't know. But I see that option on my PC clear as day right now. – n8te May 30 '19 at 8:29
  • Here's a screenshot of what it looks like on PC: i.stack.imgur.com/cQdHh.png – n8te May 30 '19 at 8:36
  • 1
    @Andreas, I agree with n8te. The original answer content was an answer to the question, just not a very good quality one. It wouldn't qualify for either flag. It was technically an answer, so NAA doesn't apply. VLQ is reserved for posts that contain nothing that can even be improved. Flags are generally for situations that require moderator intervention; things that can't be handled by the normal user tools. The original answer content could have been downvoted and/or commented, which is appropriate for issues of general low quality (mods don't judge quality). (cont'd) – fixer1234 May 30 '19 at 10:04
  • 1
    The underlying problem is that the question is poor. Without specifying the browser, the question is either too broad or a request for a product recommendation, or something that can technically be answered with the original version of that answer. – fixer1234 May 30 '19 at 10:04
  • @fixer1234 in my opinion the question is not poor. He/she just have a very limited understanding of how browsers and html works. What browser is used is irrelevant since the browser needs to be able to read the data. Product recommendation, no. Since he/she as the webmaster can't control the users it's not a product recommendation. If OP was a user of the page wanting to limit his/her access to the source code then yes it's a product recommendation. In the help section 'how to write a good answer": The answer can be “don’t do that”, but it should also include “try this instead”. – Andreas May 30 '19 at 12:52
  • Again seems to me as it's not an answer – Andreas May 30 '19 at 12:52
  • "Not An Answer" is reserved for responses that are doing things like trying to ask another question. Anything that remotely passes the very very low bar of trying to answer the question in any way (even if it's a frame challenge) does not qualify for NAA. This is the kind of situation where you could downvote/comment, but does not quite rate a flag. A poor answer is still an answer. – Bob May 30 '19 at 13:20

I think you have to get a bit 'zen' about declined flags.

I still get them occasionally, and after about 5 seconds' swearing, "WTF, why me?!? What have I done to deserve this?? Why does everybody not absolutely always agree with me, whatever I say??" yada yada, I sit back & realise it wasn't actually the end of the world. Life goes on, another flag, another day.

If you get 10 in a week, on the other hand, sit down & seriously consider what it is about your flagging that raises so many objections.

  • It's not the objections per se.. It's the fact that anything can be edited. I could write something bad here, as an example how I hate a certain religion or how people from some country is idiots and you flag it. Then I just edit my post to say rainbows and unicorns are great. Your flag was correct but it becomes irrelevant and gets rejected – Andreas Jun 28 at 10:35
  • Mods can see even comment edits, as far as I'm aware, so that doesn't quite parallel. The thing is, while they're going through their daily task of reviewing flags [for which they volunteer their own time] there's not a great deal of flexibility in the system. Can't accept it if the issue was already fixed, so it has to be declined. The system then nags your next flag telling you the last was rejected. It can't more finely delineate. – Tetsujin Jun 28 at 10:40
  • And that is why I posted this. The system is not perfect, so let's make it better by making it possible to retract your flag. The mod does not have to waste time on an issue that has already been fixed and I don't get the message that my last flag was rejected. All good! (?) Rainbows and unicorns, right? – Andreas Jun 28 at 10:44

It attempts to answer the question - the user ends up being aware its low quality and ended up fixing it. Things on that side worked as designed.

As for flags - the point of a flag is to get someone to review it, it was and at the time there was nothing to do.

We'd really like folks to elevate very low quality answers into better ones, and make non answers go away. The answer was edited, and significantly better. It wasn't a non answer, and the user had enough of an idea of how we do things to make a reasonable attempt at fixing it.

So, it was an answer, and as such not an appropriate flag, and other means proved more useful in getting our intended result.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .