8
\$\begingroup\$

We have downvotes for that (and in some cases "Very Low Quality"). It seems that basically every time I see a flag in the queue, it has at least one "Not an Answer" flag stuck to it, no matter what's wrong with it. The flag queue right now has six answers in it flagged as NAA, when all six are answers.

For reference, I'm talking about these kinds of answers. It was flagged as NAA, even though it's clearly an attempt to answer. Whether it follows the spec or not shouldn't matter, the same as on any other SE site.

I've been marking these flags as invalid, and will continue to do so. I encourage others to do the same.

Is there any dissenting opinion around here that I don't know of?

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ This is just my personal opinion, but, if the end result is "I want to request a mod to nuke this post", does it make a huge difference? From a mod workflow point of view, the process is the same either way. \$\endgroup\$ – Chris Jester-Young Apr 16 '14 at 14:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ Maybe not yet, since the site is still small. Mods on other sites have clearly said that having the wrong flag attached sucks up more time, since they have to figure out why it's actually flagged. That may not be noticeable when you're only handling a couple a day, but... isn't it the whole point of having different flag types? \$\endgroup\$ – Geobits Apr 16 '14 at 14:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also, is there even a reason for a mod to nuke them? If more people would just downvote poor answers, mods would never have to be involved with this. \$\endgroup\$ – Geobits Apr 16 '14 at 14:37
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Is this even worth a VLQ flag? \$\endgroup\$ – John Dvorak Apr 16 '14 at 14:53
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ If the question deserves a different flag (e.g. VLQ) then you shouldn't mark the flag as invalid: you should flag it correctly. (Unfortunately VLQ is only available when the answer has a negative score, so some people might have chosen NAA as the nearest available option). \$\endgroup\$ – Peter Taylor Apr 16 '14 at 14:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @PeterTaylor Most that I see flagged this way really just deserve a downvote, along with a comment explaining why they don't work or are against spec. \$\endgroup\$ – Geobits Apr 16 '14 at 14:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ I have seen a similar trend with questions being flagged as "unclear what the asker is asking" despite a very accurate explanation. If you don't like a question, just downvote it or find a more appropriate flag if possible, not just use the "unclear what he's asking" all the time. \$\endgroup\$ – vsz Apr 30 '14 at 15:32
11
\$\begingroup\$

It seems we need a sort of guide for flagging, so...

  • spam / offensive: self-explanatory
  • NAA: for posts that do not attempt to solve the challenge (examples: "I like llamas," "Wow, interesting challenge," "user12345's answer is invalid," "This challenge is boring," "I don't know, but here's a starting point for others," etc)
  • VLQ: for posts that (attempt to) solve the challenge but should be deleted for any other reason, ex. Doesn't follow spec, clearly an attempt to troll, extremely low quality and unsalvageable by editing, etc
  • Other: for exceptional or special situations, ex. Plagiarism, voting rings, etc

So, these types of answers should be flagged as VLQ.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ You cannot flag answers for very low quality. \$\endgroup\$ – Wrzlprmft Sep 23 '14 at 16:08
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wrzlprmft You can, but only if they have a negative score. \$\endgroup\$ – Doorknob Sep 23 '14 at 16:51

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