Problem: One of the main reasons I visit my flagging history is to look for helpful flags on answers that are not deleted. Flags can be marked as helpful without the post going away when a well-meaning reviewer edits a post while it's in the Low Quality Posts Queue, when the author edits the post, or when the author deletes and undeletes the post. In many instances, the post has not really been improved and should still be removed from the site, but now all flags and delete votes are removed. When I identify such posts through my flagging history page, I bring them to the attention of the community either through a chat room or by re-flagging.

Unfortunately, the flagging history does not make it very easy to find helpful flags on non-deleted posts. Basically you need to scan the list of flags looking for links with the white background indicating a non-deleted post:

enter image description here

instead of links with the gray background indicating a deleted post:

enter image description here

and then you need to ignore nearly all of the links with white backgrounds because they are helpful comment flags on posts that have not been deleted (this proposal could help reduce the visual clutter). Compounded with the relatively small number of flags listed on each page (meaning recent flags often scroll off the first page before they're handled), the current user interface makes it quite challenging to identify helpful flags on non-deleted posts.

Proposal: I propose an option to filter your flagging history to helpful flags on posts that are not currently deleted, either using tabs at the top of the page or a check box. Given that the flagging history page current displays both whether or not a flag was helpful and whether or not the relevant post is deleted, I would hope this would not be a heavy-duty implementation effort.

Similar Proposals: Filtering by each category of flag shown on the right side of the flagged posts has been proposed here and here and here and here and here. While I think this would also be a fabulous feature (the other main reason I come to the flagging history is to check out declined and disputed flags), the current proposal differs in requesting a subset of the helpful flags on posts instead of all of them.

  • "filter your flagging history to helpful flags on posts that are not currently deleted, either using tabs at the top of the page or a check box." Surely in a battle against poor content being left on the site, your "declined" and "disputed" are just as important, if not more important?
    – James
    Aug 24, 2015 at 16:07
  • @James as I indicate in the last section, I think those filters would also be great and probably even more useful. However, they were proposed on meta 4 years ago and not implemented (under the logic that they would lead to folks complaining about individual declined or disputed flags -- see here).
    – josliber
    Aug 24, 2015 at 16:09
  • 2
    Maybe the scripts from Nicael can help until this gets implemented: meta.stackexchange.com/a/250687/158100
    – rene
    Aug 24, 2015 at 16:59

1 Answer 1


I like the general idea, as it's basically about ensuring correct improvements are made.

However, this is only the case when your flag was disputed on a problematic post. As the site is community moderated there can be a split decision, and some believe "delete" is appropriate, and some an edit, or it's fine as is. So you do have to be careful with "re-flagging" or "disputing" something, because it might just be you disagree with other users and there is no "right" or "wrong" outcome.

That said, often it can be obvious what is the right action, and while bad decisions do happen and there's probably a "right and wrong" outcome in more cases than something is simply community opinion, as we have rules and specific flags etc.

In many instances, the post has not really been improved and should still be removed from the site, but now all flags and delete votes are removed

Absolutely, but also the edit could well be the improvement to stop it being closed or deleted. This is one of the main uses of editing content - to improve it and make it acceptable and on-topic.

How we manage and monitor this is essentially through community having the ability to re-address a previously flagged post - e.g. we can re-flag, vote to close and re-open, delete and undelete, etc.

So in your scenario, the way it should work (ideally) is:

  1. You flag a problematic post
  2. Something happens which "disputes" your flag (an edit etc), but it does not resolve the problem
  3. Someone else (other than you) flags the post again, it eventually gets reviewed and the problem resolved

The point of "community" moderating is while your efforts where thwarted, at some point someone else will pick up the issue and re-address it, and no real need for us all to be going back over and checking our work.

So, while it's commendable you wanting to go through these flags and meticulously ensure the precise right thing is being done, I would imagine because this is very much manual labour you are in the minority.

That's not to say I disagree with your request, nor have I downvoted it, because it will likely be still used by many people, just for reasons other than ensuring their flags were carried out in the way they originally wanted.

Lastly, rather than your specific request, I'd much rather see the flagging history (and other things) be given an entire overhaul and be granted various sorting and filtering options (I suspect this will be on a todo list somewhere, probably in a bottom drawer under some chewing gum and a Christmas hat from the last party :D)

  • Yeah, I guess I'm talking about really obvious cases, like the following: 1) Somebody posts an "answer" that is something like "I have this problem too! Here is my code -- can you help?"; 2) I flag as NAA; 3) Somebody in the Low Quality Post Queue edits to put the code in a code block, clearing the flags but obviously not fixing the post. You're definitely right that ideally somebody else would add a new NAA flag, but I've seen these sorts of posts collect dust after this happens, and I think the filter could make it easier to identify posts like this.
    – josliber
    Aug 24, 2015 at 19:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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