See: this answer to Does .net equal C#?. I flagged it as "not an answer", and said flag was rejected. The text says "flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer".

Now, if the answer were merely wrong, I wouldn't have flagged it. But the answer refers to Lisp, C, Python, Ruby....pretty much everything BUT .net or C#. How does this qualify as an answer to the question?

And assuming someone agrees with me here, how do I get my flag weight back? :P


Ok, so... Two things:

Wait, scratch that. Three things:

  1. It's an answer. It attempts to answer the question. It's not a very good answer. But then again, it's not a very good question, in part because it leaves the door open for lousy answers like that.

  2. You can't appeal flags. That just misses the whole point. The moderator who responded didn't do anything. He didn't see anything that needed to be done. And that's really the issue here: if you want to argue that something should have been done, you should... Well, do that. Maybe start by leaving a comment on that answer, detailing how you find it problematic, and what you think should happen to it to make it less of a problem.

  3. Don't worry about flag weight. Please, please just don't. It's like worrying about reputation - you're focusing on the number instead of what leads to it - worry that you're wasting moderators' time, or worry that moderators aren't responding to flags that they should; the flag weight thing is a symptom of one or the other - don't treat symptoms.

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    I'm not worried about flag weight, other than trying to get it to 750. :) But i do tend to see it as evidence that i know what i'm doing when i flag, and that i'm not wasting people's time when i do so. Rejected flags would get me a bit upset even if no one could see flag weight, cause i don't flag what i don't believe needs acting on. – cHao Nov 19 '11 at 3:40
  • 3
    @cHao: then act on that - the best way to make sure a moderator doesn't misinterpret what you want is to make it explicit. But please, keep in mind that moderators are the exception handlers - if there's something you can do on your own (critique in a comment, down-vote) you should - if everyone did that, we'd need a lot less moderators tromping around here. – Shog9 Nov 19 '11 at 3:48

I was the moderator who declined that flag. The question itself is not really a good fit for our site and falls into the category of "things not to ask" on Stack Overflow.

We discourage these types of questions because they attract anecdotal answers rather than technical facts, such as the answer you flagged, and no one answer is the correct one. The OP even leaves the door open in his question:

Does being a .NET developer mean knowing C# or mean knowing something else?

If such questions were allowed, then whilst that answer isn't fantastic, it's still an answer, and an answer that gives an anecdotal different slant on what the OP should perhaps do instead. i.e. don't focus on C# but learn an academic language such as Lisp or Scheme, then learn C# etc.

If you wanted me to delete that answer then in all fairness the rest should be deleted as not an answer as well due to the nature of the question. This is why I closed the question as not constructive.

| improve this answer | |
  • +1 for explaining the thought process. Agreed, the rest could be considered delete-worthy as well. I just found that particular "answer" blatantly so. :) Closing the whole mess works. – cHao Nov 19 '11 at 14:49

Let's pull up part of the original version of the post:

I have 11 years old and I have a stupid question! ;)

Being a .Net Developer means knowing C# or means knowing something else?

Assuming it's true, which you kind of have to do in order to answer it, this is a kid looking for direction. The bit about C# isn't the main issue here, it's a symptom of his general ignorance because he's 11. The poster was trying to be helpful by addressing the real issue, which is that the kid doesn't know much about anything yet.

As for flag weight, it's not like rep. While mods strive to be fair and so on, flag weight is a number used by the system and has no value to the individual (except psychological, which it shouldn't). There is no appeal process, but you'll get it back easily if you flag well, and flagging well is all that matters (besides being the only way to get the flag weight "back").

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    "you'll get it back easily if you flag well," Well, "easily" is quite an understatement here. The OP will need 80-90 helpful flags with none declined to get back the 10 flag weight points he lost from 1 (!) declined flag. Refer to item 2 here: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/112138/… – NullUserException อ_อ Nov 19 '11 at 4:02
  • @NullUserExceptionอ_อ Ah, I didn't check what his flag weight was. I do agree that punishing good flaggers proportionally more than bad ones is strange, but at the same time I'm not confident that the system treats flags from 739-flag-weight users so differently from flags from 749-flag-weight-users that it's a problem. – user154510 Nov 19 '11 at 4:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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