What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

Henry Ford taught me that the most efficient way to perform repetitive tasks is to sort them by type.

Can we have the ability to filter mod tags? Categories could include

Spam flags
Comment flags
Low quality flags
Not an answer flags
Exact duplicate flags

The idea being that it is easier to deal with questions of a particular type. Its not because I want to take care of all the easier flags. That has nothing to do with it. I swear.

share|improve this question
    
Wouldn't this kind of mess up the "sorting by flag importance" thing? –  Michael Mrozek Oct 24 '11 at 3:09
4  
@MichaelMrozek Could still sort by importance within each category. –  Anna Lear Oct 24 '11 at 3:19
    
@AnnaLear Sure, but why would you handle all flags of a particular type before handling the most important flag of another type? –  Michael Mrozek Oct 24 '11 at 3:22
6  
@MichaelMrozek If I only have a bit of time, I might not want to look at flags that require investigation, but I could knock off a few spam flags pretty quickly. It's not as good as dealing with the absolute most important flags, but the site's still better off than if I hadn't done anything at all. (Mind you, Programmers doesn't see enough flags at a given time that I'd get tangible benefit from this request either way.) –  Anna Lear Oct 24 '11 at 3:25
4  
@MichaelMrozek: If you want to handle the most important flags, then just handle them. IMHO, "most important" sorting is BS anyhow. You open up the flag list and see page 1 is full of "not an answer" flags while spam flags are randomly sprinkled throughout the rest of the pages. Besides, they're flags, not nuclear reactor warnings. They can sit for a few minutes. –  Won't Oct 24 '11 at 13:36

2 Answers 2

up vote 8 down vote accepted

There UI can now be filtered (on the right) into various categories, making it easy to:

  • focus on more important issues, without getting swamped by close-requests (etc), which the community can also deal with via voting
  • quickly and easily blitz things that are obvious ("me too" answers and comment flags rarely take much thinking, for example)

I've also added a bit more pattern-recognition on new messages (not applied retroactively) to re-categorise some of the "other..." (custom messages) ones more appropriately (exact-duplicate, migration, etc)

share|improve this answer
2  
Could you add a similar filtering for the 10k mod tools flag view? This would allow the non-moderator users to close questions quicker, without having to slug through all the not-an-answer flags (where we can't do anything). –  Paŭlo Ebermann Oct 26 '11 at 11:51
    
@Paŭlo sure, I can look at that - the data is different, though, so it isn't just a case of turning on a switch –  Marc Gravell Oct 26 '11 at 11:54
    
@PaŭloEbermann When you see a "not an answer" flag, and you think the answer is not really an answer, you can flag the answer for the same reason, or use the "invalid flags" flag, if you think the answer is really an answer. –  kiamlaluno Oct 26 '11 at 11:54
    
@Paŭlo and can I check : on "not an answer", you should have some kind of "agree/disagree" - am I misremembering? –  Marc Gravell Oct 26 '11 at 11:57
    
@kiamlaluno Yes, I can (and I I gained much of my flag weight this way after getting access to the 10k tools) ... but this will not help reducing the moderator queue (and letting the moderators come earlier to my migration flags), while close-votes really help. And there are that many NaA-flags nowadays (okay, today not that many as usual). –  Paŭlo Ebermann Oct 26 '11 at 12:01
    
@Paŭlo which is something we are discussing options about internally –  Marc Gravell Oct 26 '11 at 12:05
    
@Marc Yes, I can flag again or flag as "invalid flag". (The latter has the effect that the original flagger gets no flag weight reduction when a moderator finally dismisses it. The former has the effect that this answer moves even further up in the moderator queue, so my migration flag gets even less love.) –  Paŭlo Ebermann Oct 26 '11 at 12:05
    
@PaŭloEbermann It doesn't help reducing the moderator queue, but I think that for the moderators it makes a difference if more users flag a post for the same reason. It also helps you, who don't see anymore that flag when you look at the flag page the next time. :-) –  kiamlaluno Oct 26 '11 at 12:06
    
@Paŭlo they are categorized separately (especially now). I do not imagine it will impact your migration, and note that off-topic is something that can already generally be done by community voting, rather than raising it as an exception –  Marc Gravell Oct 26 '11 at 12:07
    
My migration flags are migrations to other sites than the default five (usually crypto and TeX). I need moderator intervention there. (The community can close as off-topic, but this will not help moving the post to the right site.) –  Paŭlo Ebermann Oct 26 '11 at 12:11
    
Okay, I gotta say I LOVE THIS. I've even found myself dealing with flags I normally skip over. And its easier to clear out similar flags than I thought it would be. NICE! –  Won't Oct 26 '11 at 14:47
    
So, it appears that all low quality and migration flags have been passed exclusively to 10k mods. Is that the plan? If so, its a bit of a pain to try and handle these flags via the 10k mod tools interface... –  Won't Nov 1 '11 at 20:41
    
@Won'tಠ_ಠ help me out... the "close" dialog is identical on both, right?...? –  Marc Gravell Nov 1 '11 at 20:45
    
@MarcGravell: True, but you can't directly burninate a flag. You have to flag it as an invalid flag, then go back to the mod tools to clear it out. –  Won't Nov 1 '11 at 20:50
1  
@MarcGravell: Pass that buck! –  Won't Nov 3 '11 at 12:45

One feature I would like to add to this...

Add the most common action to the list of actions at the bottom of each flag for that particular flag type.

For example, if you sort for "not constructive" flags, then the list of options at the bottom should be something similar to this:

new option list

  • Close as... opens the Why should this question be closed? dialog
  • Close question closes the question for the flag reason
  • Dismiss as helpful dismisses the flag as helpful
  • Dismiss as... opens the These flags are… dialog
  • Other opens the mod action dialog on the post (I'm not sold on this)

It would be different per filter. For Spam flags, you might have a "Delete and Notify" button which deletes the question/answer and opens the Moderator Private Message page, or you might have a "Destroy" button which just destroys the user.

Cuts down on the clickies.

share|improve this answer
3  
Seems like you could merge the "Close as..." and "Close question" options. The new button would take you to the close dialog, and the reason given in the flag would be preselected. You'd be able to switch to any of the other reasons if you wanted to, of course. (EDIT: you could also simplify further by providing only one button for each flag, "Destroy user." Naturally, that interface would only be for Will.) –  Pops Oct 24 '11 at 19:14
    
@PopularDemand Do you want to destroy the flagger, the poster, or both? –  Paŭlo Ebermann Oct 26 '11 at 11:53
    
can I get your thoughts on the initial cut before we start adding features? (happy to add features that help - simply: often the perceived requirement changes once people get to play with it) –  Marc Gravell Oct 26 '11 at 11:55
    
@Paŭlo the phrase "destroy" only ever applies to users - it is a specific mod action that is particularly delete-happy. –  Marc Gravell Oct 26 '11 at 11:55
    
@MarcGravell: Happily. –  Won't Oct 26 '11 at 13:40

You must log in to answer this question.

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