I recently raised a "Very Low Quality" flag against this post: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/18778705/what-server-or-domain-name-is-suitable-for-service-stack The flag was just disputed. The post itself was a miserable one line wreck that's yet to actually be fixed. The post:

What server is suitable for service stack?Please answer for me. I want to know This. My writing scale is weak.

Why would a flag on such a poor quality post be disputed? I'm completely dumbfounded here. The "Very Low Quality" flag states:

This question has severe formatting or content problems. This question is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.

Does a single line, poor quality question such as this really not qualify? I admit it could be closed under other flags as well (it asks for a software recommendation), but the question itself is still poor quality. Why was the flag disputed?


1 Answer 1


There is a question there. Its not that great. But there is a question there. There are no severe formatting or content problems. Its just a poor question with poor english language skills.

Else-meta, Why is this question not low quality? one of the mods had this to say about the flag:

The "very low quality" flag is intended for questions that have severe formatting or content problems, that can't be solved by editing and/or commenting. If you can parse the question and understand what it says, it's not a "very low quality" one.

I don't know what the question is actually asking (though, I can parse it), its a bit unclear. And that should be the flag (as an close reason).

  • 1
    I reflagged as "unclear what you're asking". I agree with Qantas, it doesn't appear salvageable to me either. You've got a single, very unclear, very incoherent line that OP doesn't appear set on fixing or clarifying. It fits the description of "unclear what you're asking" but that doesn't mean "very low quality" is wrong. Commented Sep 14, 2013 at 2:41
  • 1
    @ZachSmith the OP asked the question 21h ago and was on as recently as 15h ago. In that timeframe there have been no comments or "what are you asking" or even a prompt closure to read the closure reason. If you don't know what the problem is with a post, how is one expected to improve upon it?
    – user213963
    Commented Sep 14, 2013 at 2:45
  • 2
    Downvotes are usually enough a sign that there's something wrong with your question on SO. Commented Sep 14, 2013 at 2:46
  • @ZachSmith yes... but what? At least now there's a close reason to help guide the user if he or she should come back. I would contend that this serves to show that rapid closure (sigh the review queue, I know - and none of us have the SO rep requisite to help there) is a good thing as it does provide some feedback in the absence of comments.
    – user213963
    Commented Sep 14, 2013 at 2:50
  • 7
    Okay, sure, there's a grammatical question as the first sentence, but those seven words constitute the entirety of the useful content, and it's not even clear what they're referring to. This post is a warm turd left on the doorstep. "Editing" it into answerability means writing an entire question from scratch. If this isn't Low Quality, then there's no such thing.
    – jscs
    Commented Sep 14, 2013 at 3:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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