Timeline for What happened to flag weight?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 13:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Jan 20, 2012 at 22:31 | comment | added | waffles | @PeterO. correct ... the quote is talking about abusive actions, 4% decline should be ok ... 50% a disaster | |
| Jan 20, 2012 at 18:52 | comment | added | Peter O. | Exactly. Now users need not be as afraid to get one or two declined flags (from among many helpful flags) as they may have before. That quote probably means that only egregious cases where users have a significant proportion of declined flags and relatively few helpful flags should be dealt with. | |
| Jan 20, 2012 at 18:45 | comment | added | PersonalNexus | It is understood that there are checks to prevent abuse. I was more concerned about the penalties for high-flag-weight users for whom one instance of being on the wrong side of a judgement call could have meant a substantial loss of flag weight. I know that I will be more inclined now to flag some less obvious cases where before I would have been afraid to lose flag weight and not have flagged those. | |
| Jan 20, 2012 at 7:12 | history | answered | Peter O. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |