Return to Question

Considering the information moderators see when other flags are used, why aren't they able to see who flagged a post as spam?

It would be helpful when there are many flags that need to be handled, and moderators want to first handle the most critical ones. If I see a post flagged by a user who keeps spam-flagging posts simply because they contain a link, or who keeps flagging posts without a good reason, I would handle the flags from that user as last step.

Probably, this is relevant on sites smaller than Stack Overflow. I saw what I considered spam posts only in few cases, on Stack Overflow, and I guess that most of the spam is not handled by moderators.

I recently saw a spam flag raised for a question that is not spam (the link is for 10k users on Drupal Answers).

If the flag was raised from a high reputation user, I could think the post was initially spam, but it has been edited not to contain spam links (or links that could be considered spam) during the grace period; in this case, I would keep an eye on the user who posted the answer/question. If the flag was raised from a low reputation user, I could think the flag was used by mistake (which could happen to a high reputation user, though), and I would not keep an eye on the user who wrote the post. Knowing who flagged the post doesn't change how I handle it, but help understanding if there is a possible problem.

If a user keeps flagging as spam something that is not spam, and the system doesn't stop her/him from flagging as spam any further post (in the same way a user who suggests consecutive edits that are rejected is not allowed to suggest edits for seven days), moderators should know who is that user, to take any necessary action.

Considering the information moderators see when other flags are used, why aren't they able to see who flagged a post as spam?

It would be helpful when there are many flags that need to be handled, and moderators want to first handle the most critical ones. If I see a post flagged by a user who keeps spam-flagging posts simply because they contain a link, or who keeps flagging posts without a good reason, I would handle the flags from that user as last step.

Probably, this is relevant on sites smaller than Stack Overflow. I saw what I considered spam posts only in few cases, on Stack Overflow, and I guess that most of the spam is not handled by moderators.

I recently saw a spam flag raised for a question that is not spam (the link is for 10k users on Drupal Answers).

If the flag was raised from a high reputation user, I could think the post was initially spam, but it has been edited not to contain spam links (or links that could be considered spam) during the grace period; in this case, I would keep an eye on the user who posted the answer/question. If the flag was raised from a low reputation user, I could think the flag was used by mistake (which could happen to a high reputation user, though), and I would not keep an eye on the user who wrote the post. Knowing who flagged the post doesn't change how I handle it, but help understanding if there is a possible problem.

If a user keeps flagging as spam something that is not spam, and the system doesn't stop her/him from flagging as spam any further post (in the same way a user who suggests consecutive edits that are rejected is not allowed to suggest edits for seven days), moderators should know who is that user, to take any necessary action.

Considering the information moderators see when other flags are used, why aren't they able to see who flagged a post as spam?

It would be helpful when there are many flags that need to be handled, and moderators want to first handle the most critical ones. If I see a post flagged by a user who keeps spam-flagging posts simply because they contain a link, or who keeps flagging posts without a good reason, I would handle the flags from that user as last step.

Probably, this is relevant on sites smaller than Stack Overflow. I saw what I considered spam posts only in few cases, on Stack Overflow, and I guess that most of the spam is not handled by moderators.

I recently saw a spam flag raised for a question that is not spam (the link is for 10k users on Drupal Answers).

If the flag was raised from a high reputation user, I could think the post was initially spam, but it has been edited not to contain spam links (or links that could be considered spam); in this case, I would keep an eye on the user who posted the answer/question. If the flag was raised from a low reputation user, I could think the flag was used by mistake (which could happen to a high reputation user, though), and I would not keep an eye on the user who wrote the post. Knowing who flagged the post doesn't change how I handle it, but help understanding if there is a possible problem.

Considering the information moderators see when other flags are used, why aren't they able to see who flagged a post as spam?

It would be helpful when there are many flags that need to be handled, and moderators want to first handle the most critical ones. If I see a post flagged by a user who keeps spam-flagging posts simply because they contain a link, or who keeps flagging posts without a good reason, I would handle the flags from that user as last step.

Probably, this is relevant on sites smaller than Stack Overflow. I saw what I considered spam posts only in few cases, on Stack Overflow, and I guess that most of the spam is not handled by moderators.

I recently saw a spam flag raised for a question that is not spam (the link is for 10k users on Drupal Answers).

If the flag was raised from a high reputation user, I could think the post was initially spam, but it has been edited not to contain spam links (or links that could be considered spam) during the grace period; in this case, I would keep an eye on the user who posted the answer/question. If the flag was raised from a low reputation user, I could think the flag was used by mistake (which could happen to a high reputation user, though), and I would not keep an eye on the user who wrote the post. Knowing who flagged the post doesn't change how I handle it, but help understanding if there is a possible problem.

If a user keeps flagging as spam something that is not spam, and the system doesn't stop her/him from flagging as spam any further post (in the same way a user who suggests consecutive edits that are rejected is not allowed to suggest edits for seven days), moderators should know who is that user, to take any necessary action.