In How does the Offensive Flag work?, I read the description about a post earned 6 flags (spam or offensive):

6 flags (spam or offensive): post is locked, deleted, and the first revision owner loses 100 reputation.

I think this rule is unreasonable. Let us imagine such a scene:

  1. I post a great answer.
  2. Someone (with full edit rights) edits my answer, and spamming on it. So other users hate the answer can be expected.
  3. Then the spamming revison brings 6 spam or offensive flags, and my answer will be deleted.
  4. According to the rule, as first revision owner, I, instead of the spamming revision owner, will lose my 100 reputation.

Yes, I post the answer, however I never do anything wrong in this post. I will be punished, and the malefactor remain at large.

So, I think, reduce the spam/offensive revision owner's 100 reputation when a post was flaged as spam or offensive is more reasonable. Do you think so?

  • Has this ever actually happened? – Cody Gray Aug 4 '11 at 9:17
  • @Cody Gray, No, But I think the case is possible happen(theoretically) – Charlie Aug 4 '11 at 10:14
  • Out of curiosity, why was Roy1 attacked with -15? It seemed like a legitimate concern and a case where abuse could flourish. – user173448 Jan 13 '14 at 13:34

What about this case:

  • You post spam, bacon, sausage and spam with extra spam
  • User with 2k edit privileges comes by and gets rid of the spammy title.
  • However, body is still spammy and 6 users flag it as such.
  • Or alternatively, he completes his edit just before someone flags it for the 6th time as spam.

Who should get penalized? According to your rule, the innocent editor should be docked 100 points for trying to help, but falling short.

In reality, you'll find that users with 2k privileges are hardly the spammy ones. Sure, they might not all have stellar edits or might reject decent suggestions. However, spammers are usually drive by users/bots with extremely low rep.

If the situation you describe has happened and you have been unfairly penalized, then bring it to meta and we'll discuss. I'm sure a developer can fix the issue for you.


If this ever actually happens, you should make a case for it here and it will surely be amended. This seems rare for a user to add spam links to someone else's post instead of their own, and I've never seen it, but it is possible. However, users under 2000 rep can only suggest edits, so it is unlikely.

Now imagine this scenario:

  • Some random new user posts a spam link.
  • I edit the post to say [spam removed], remove the link, and flag the post.
  • The post collects spam flags and is deleted, and now I was the last editor. I lose 100 rep.

Not very fair, right?

I don't expect your case to some up - but if it does, definitely bring it to meta so it can be handled appropriately.

  • If the first revision owner do spamming, and you edit it, no one will flag it. – Charlie Aug 4 '11 at 6:22
  • 1
    That's why I tend to leave a note that spam was removed. I've had this happen a lot with posts that are nothing but a spam link, so they end up as nothing but [spam removed] after I edit the post. Maybe this isn't the kind of post you are talking about though, but this sounds more theoretical than a real issue. Those cases were all new users with 1 rep as well, so the -100 meant nothing. – user159834 Aug 4 '11 at 6:34

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