5

When someone flag with a Low Quality Post a question or answer, and someone edits the post, the flag becomes disputed, which means that the flag is automatically dismissed and you lose the ability to flag again, even if the edit make the post even worse.

I don't think this should be like this. There is a lot of link-only posts that usually become edited to keep the link inside some word as a hyperlink instead of the absolute path.

I think the flags should be dismissed when a edit is made, but keep the ability to flag this post again, at least a number of times.

This cause sometimes to think in flagging the post as a Not an answer, resulting in a possible flag declined.

Improve this question
  • You can always use "Other", I think that one is not limited. – Shadow Wizard is Vaccinating Aug 29 '13 at 8:36
  • possible duplicate of Please take care when flagging answers as "low quality." – gnat Aug 29 '13 at 8:38
  • 4
    @gnat: not a dupe, but certainly something the OP should read. – Martijn Pieters Aug 29 '13 at 8:41
  • @MartijnPieters I feel it's close enough to be a dupe. One has to think twice before casting a flag that implies the post is truly unsalvageable, and generally, an edit made to the post is a good sign that flag wasn't OK. There can be exceptions to this of course but these are almost impossible with "link-only posts" that can typically be salvaged by simply adding a brief summary from the referenced link – gnat Aug 29 '13 at 8:47
  • another dupe: Why were these “Very low quality” flags declined? – gnat Aug 29 '13 at 8:49
  • 1
    I am very familiar with the arguments, the OP should probably not be using the low quality flag. I am not convinced this is a dupe though. The question may be moot if a better flag is not dismissed on edit, perhaps. – Martijn Pieters Aug 29 '13 at 8:49
  • 2
    @gnat no these aren't dupes. This post here is request to be able to flag again after such flag disputed, which is a brand new request. – Shadow Wizard is Vaccinating Aug 29 '13 at 8:57
  • @ShaWizDowArd agree, that's a valid explanation (retracted my close vote) – gnat Aug 29 '13 at 9:01
  • This request has nothing to do with that post. Is somewhat related, but certainly not duplicate. – SysDragon Aug 29 '13 at 9:59
  • 1
    @SysDragon yep the user who originally voted to close understands that and retracted his vote, probably other user followed his lead and still didn't see the comments. – Shadow Wizard is Vaccinating Aug 29 '13 at 11:12
  • @ShaWizDowArd I saw that gnat retracted, im just writing in general my frustation about it. Here I have low reputation, what can I do to reverse the "duplicate state"? – SysDragon Aug 29 '13 at 11:38
  • @SysDragon nothing, and even high rep user is helpless in such a situation; however it's just one vote out of five that are required to actually close the question so it's really not a big deal. If it will get closed in the end, just flag choose "other" and explain, moderator can then reopen it. – Shadow Wizard is Vaccinating Aug 29 '13 at 11:44
  • @SysDragon if it gets closed, generic approach would be after close to edit the question, highlighting the difference to "wrong dupe"; that would trigger placing it into reopen review queue and in your case, most likely reopening. Anyway I bookmarked your question and if it gets incorrectly closed, will vote reopen (this also would trigger its inclusion into reopen review queue) – gnat Aug 29 '13 at 17:04
  • @gnat "generally, an edit made to the post is a good sign that flag wasn't OK". Low quality flag include "Im having this problem too" or "thank you" subflags, and an edit will not correct that. – SysDragon Sep 4 '13 at 12:36

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .