Ok... I stand by my original answer, but I'm adding another one to address the confusion raised by the declined flags in your screenshots. First off, let's be clear about two things:
Moderators do make mistakes, and different moderators handle different flags differently.
Discussing flag-handling without the context of the answers being flagged is pointless at best.
With that out of the way, here are the two answers that were flagged:
Here's a way to do it (including the command-line parameters) using a Gant script; see How can I run a Groovy class from the command-line within a Grails environment?
^^^ Flagged as "link-only answer". Question not flagged as a duplicate, probably because the person who posted that answer posted the actual answer he was linking to in his question. No one bothered pointing this out to him, or informing the moderator of this.
I think this is a duplicate question.
Prevent Gnome Terminal From Exiting After Execution
and possibly this
Avoid gnome-terminal close after script execution?
^^^ Flagged as "not an answer" - by eight different people - AND flagged as "Links only answer" by one person. All flags declined. Number of "duplicate" flags or votes on the question itself? Zero.
Do you see what I'm getting at in my other answer now? If you expect consistent handling for a flag reason that's trite and overly-broad, you're in for a lot of disappointment. Nine flags on that last answer, but no one bothered looking at the bigger problem: the question itself was a duplicate. This isn't even rare. Usually, the moderator handling these will mark the flag as helpful if he ends up doing anything - but sometimes, they get frustrated with stuff like this...
On Stack Overflow, the top moderators are handling hundreds of these sorts of flags every day. They generally do a really great job of it, but... Their time is precious. Most "not answers" are readily identifiable as such - so when there's a bit of subtlety to it, it's worth calling that out. If you don't, and the moderator misses it, it'll be them - not you - getting called out here on Meta, called fascists in comments, harassed via email. For this reason, they'll generally try to figure out what (if anything) actually needs to be done in response to a flag, even if the flag reason is unclear - and if they think you were flagging in good faith, they'll generally mark it as helpful.
Rather than looking at a couple of data-points, let's look at everything:
- Not an answer - all-time "helpful" rate: 97%
- Some variation on "link only answer" - all-time days "helpful" rate: 97%
- Not an answer - last 90 days "helpful" rate: 96%
- Some variation on "link only answer" - last 90 days "helpful" rate: 97%
- "Strong candidate for linkrot" - last 90 days "helpful" rate: 100%
Moderators can make mistakes, but they're not thoughtless - if there's some validity to your flag, even if you did a really poor job of explaining the situation, chances are it'll still be marked as helpful. If you're really concerned though, take a few extra seconds and explain the specific problem.
I'll state this again for emphasis: stop looking for yet another trite bit of text you can easily slap on a dozen different types of answers; if an answer clearly "makes no effort to answer the question" then just use NAA - otherwise, describe the actual problem.