Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

The flagged question with

"I would like to.." but not shown what was done to solve the problem

was declined.

Isn't this question really bad one?


declined with:

declined - What's REALLY crazy is that someone would bounty this 4 year old, unanswered question. We'll see, I guess...

as a text shows - moderator has read the question and also found the date of the creation was 4 year ago. But he (or she) not found it should be closed

share|improve this question
What was the reason the moderator provided when s/he declined your flag? Did you explicitly request for the bounty to be removed so the question can be closed, or is the sentence in your question the full text of your flag? – Frédéric Hamidi Nov 18 '13 at 10:49
@FrédéricHamidi updated my question – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 10:54
I note last time round the comment of "You could have been a bit more descriptive" came up as well – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 11:18
I was just looking for a duplicate of this and I realise I actually said this to you last time. You know one definition of madness is to repeat the same actions while expecting different results – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 11:28
I not see it as a duplicate cause it shows the problems we have with bounty questions. If they are really bad one and can be closed only dimond moderators – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:48
There is a subtle difference between these two questions that you asked, it would have alleviated confusion if you had made that clearer in the title, or opening sentence :) – Tim Post Nov 18 '13 at 11:51
@TimPost thank you for edit :) – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:52
My 2 cents - that's a perfectly valid question if edited just a bit. Maybe I'll go do that. It is basic, but it is a problem a beginner would face. – Tim Post Nov 18 '13 at 11:54
@TimPost how would you edit it in the way showing what TS has already done? :) – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:56
@TimPost - The answer remains the same: "You could have been a bit more descriptive while flagging" :) – hims056 Nov 18 '13 at 11:57
@TimPost - ok I ll go and flag it now with "This question has a bounty on it and so cannot be closed by the community. However it fails the "minimum understanding of the problem to be solved" requirement. If possible could it have the bounty removed and be closed?" – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:58
@MikroDel That's a much better flag, I'm sure it will at least be validated, but I honestly don't see the problem with waiting to see if the bounty attracts a killer answer, which would provide better context that could be put into the question. It's only 7 days ... but anyway, much better. – Tim Post Nov 18 '13 at 12:02

Re your edit it seems the Mod did realise this was a bountied question that you wanted closed, however the following still applies

Remember flags are handled fast, your flag message is more of a cryptic clue than an explanatory text. When flagging, always include the following

  • What you want the moderator to do
  • Why you want them to do it
  • If not blatantly obvious: why you can't do it yourself.

So your flag was likely declined because it looks like someone flagging for ♦ moderator attention because they think the question should be closed -- which is usually the wrong flag to use as it goes to the wrong queue.

A more clear flag message would have been:

This question has a bounty on it and so cannot be closed by the community. However it fails the "minimum understanding of the problem to be solved" requirement. If possible could it have the bounty removed and be closed?

share|improve this answer
If I flag a question - sure I want it to be closed. As all the people who flag something – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 10:55
Thats mean "What you want the moderator to do" is always answered with "delete/close/put on hold" – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 10:56
@MikroDel Not true, moderators do other things. But the most important thing to show for this type of flag is that the flag is valid, you might be flagging wrong (most flags to moderators requesting closes are people flagging wrong, as such the moderator is already on a hair trigger for decline), you want to show it's valid in the first sentence "This question has a bounty on it and so cannot be closed by the community" puts them immediately in the "ah yes, this exception, I know this" workflow – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 10:57
@MikroDel: "sure I want it to be closed. As all the people who flag something" What makes you so sure? There can be many reasons to flag a question and not all of them involve closing it. – BoltClock's a Unicorn Nov 18 '13 at 10:59
@BoltClock'saUnicorn - if the question is not closed - what are the reason to flag it in addition to close/delete/put on hold? – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:02
@MicroDel I'm suspicious the OP of this question is involved in voting fraud, the comments on this question have gotten out of hand, can this question be migrated where a migration path doesn't exist etc – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 11:04
@RichardTingle "the comments on this question have gotten out of hand" so delete it or not? "OP of this question is involved in voting fraud" - so the votings should be deleted? – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:07
@MikroDel Neither of those involve the question being deleted/put on hold. You are still trying to package your flags in cryptic form. "Destroy thing implied by this other thing", this is not helpful. Just say what you want to say rather than vaguely implying it – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 11:09
@MikroDel It should be noted that at first I wrote a comment on your question asking what your flag message was because I thought your quoted flag message was what you were actually flagging. – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 11:11
@RichardTingle you gave examples of flagging comments or votes - and I answered that the action that user wants with flagging comments or votes is delete/close - almost always – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 11:12
@MikroDel You can't flag votes and in my example the question was flagged not the comments (which is recommended when you want to flag a large number of comments on a question). Also, why are you ignoring the migration flag? – Richard Tingle Nov 18 '13 at 11:13
@Richard Tingle: Well, technically, migration is a form of closure... :P – BoltClock's a Unicorn Nov 18 '13 at 11:24

I declined that flag. Here's why:

  • It wasn't a great question, but I do believe it is an answerable question. As Tim's edit demonstrates, a little bit of spit-polish goes a long way - you could've done this too. As a general rule, try to handle situations like this yourself before asking someone else to do it - if you're not going to use your "edit everything" privilege, then what good is it?

  • As a general rule, I'm very reluctant to revoke bounties. I think it sends the wrong message to folks offering them: note that there's normally no way to retract a bounty. If a question is a real mess, I'll revoke and close - but as I noted above, this wasn't that bad.

  • It had 4 years to get closed, but didn't. Until this meta post, there wasn't a single down-vote on the question... Not even one from you. It even managed to escape the automated deletion scripts and attract a bounty from a 3rd-party who was interested in finding an answer! All else being equal, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a question that has made it through such a tough gauntlet.

As others noted, your flag reason sucked if your goal was explicitly to get the bounty revoked and the question closed. You described a possible problem with the question; you should expect that anyone handling such a flag is going to evaluate the problem and take action if they think action is warranted. In this case, I did not, and left my evaluation as a custom decline reason on the flag. Given you didn't edit, vote or comment on the post, I suspect I put more time into declining your flag than you did into reviewing that post - next time, try and change that ratio a bit and you'll likely see more positive results.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for answer! I agree that it can be described more than I did. – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 16:39
Not agree that the question even now after edit good is. Its not a middle quality - its bad. It was alive for 4 years - yes. Other way there is no rule that say - "a crap after some times of life will be not a crap any more". It is answerable - sure. – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 16:41
Stop and think about this for a minute: the only reason you care about this question, the only reason you're even aware of this question, is that someone else - not the person who asked it - decided they wanted an answer to it and put a bounty on it. – Shog9 Nov 18 '13 at 16:56
someone else put bounty on it and that the reason why I have found it. And what is wrong with it? Maybe it was better from the person who put bounty on it to create a new - good question - and to close this old one. – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 17:07
Is it? Did you leave a comment suggesting that to them? – Shog9 Nov 18 '13 at 17:14
Following this logic someone should leave also comment to me, that I should leave comment to them :) You are not awarding bounty automatically - and before you award it you take a look at the question. This would be enough to see that is was a bad one. – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 17:36
What logic? You're saying a four-year-old question should suddenly become an urgent moderator issue because someone else wants an answer to it? Explain why. – Shog9 Nov 18 '13 at 17:41
Its not about how old this question is. The question cannot be made better with edit and I cannot use flag (normal one) cause it has bounty. So how can I make thing a little better - use flag with free text to close it. – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 17:46
In all this chane - someone who ask the question, queue before bounty, the person who give bounty to it - I was the first who try to make it really better. It was not the best try of me - bad flag description, but it was a try. – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 17:46
I appreciate that your goals were noble, @Mikro - but you went about achieving them in a very inefficient manner. Imagine you're walking down the street and you see a bit of rubbish in an alleyway - do you pick it up? Encourage others to not litter? Or do you call the city's emergency hotline? You could have edited the question, you could have provided some useful guidance to the author or person who offered the bounty, you could have at least down-voted the question if you thought it was poor and couldn't fix it... But you didn't do any of this; you raised a flag for someone else. – Shog9 Nov 18 '13 at 17:56
edit wasnt an option this time, provided some useful guidance - maybe yes. Maybe cause these persons are not new here. But ok lets see how helpful will be advice as a comment in a similiar situations next time – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 17:59
It's easy to find an excuse for not doing something to improve a situation, @Mikro. But it boils down to this: if everyone picks up trash when they see it, we have clean streets; if everyone just shrugs and says, "let the official janitors do it", then we need an insane number of janitors... Practically-speaking, the streets just stay dirty. – Shog9 Nov 18 '13 at 18:02
I dont think that the situations are comparable - or we start open end discussion =) – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 18:04
For me its better to let the people pay - who make trash - but it aslo depends on many factors.. But idea is clear yes – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 18:06
anyway thank you for answer and for discussion – MikroDel Nov 18 '13 at 18:09

You must log in to answer this question.

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