Reason

It is my understanding that casting a very low quality or not an answer flag on an answer that already has received such flag only affects the flag statistics and the number of positive reviews needed to dequeue. Thus, if:

  • I have access to the low-quality queue (2 k on graduated sites),
  • I see an answer that I deem deleteworthy,
  • I suspect that somebody has flagged this answer before me (which is almost always true and can be certain if I see a canned comment),

it is more effective to go to the low-quality queue, seek out the answer and choose Recommend Deletion/Delete, while flagging it has most likely no effect. This is tedious for those who act accordingly and a waste of decisions from those who just flag.

Moreover, it is not that obvious for many that after becoming trusted users (20 k), they can do something else with deleteworthy and negatively scored answers, namely directly voting to delete them – which is mostly equivalent to what they can do from the low-quality queue. Again, decision capabilities are not used optimally.

Suggestion

I thus suggest the following for answers that are already enqueued in the low-quality queue:

  • A VLQ or NAA flag from a user with a reputation between 2 k and 20 k should have the same effect as if this user had chosen Recommend Deletion in the low-quality queue.

  • A VLQ or NAA flag from a user with a reputation above 20 k should have the same effect as if this user had chosen Delete in the low-quality queue and automatically cast a delete vote if the answer has a negative score. (And while we are at it, a delete vote should automatically cast an NAA or VLQ flag.)

Some considerations or non-considerations:

  • I haven’t made up my mind how exactly such flags count towards review and flag statistics.

  • Probably, something needs to be done with users who have performed the maximum of daily reviews in the low-quality queue or are review-banned.

  • This deprives 2 k users of the ability to plainly send a post to the low-quality queue, which may be a good choice on rare occasions where you are unsure about a post due to lacking topic knowledge. On the other hand, if that post is already enqueued, you are likely making the right decision and if not, at least two other people need to make the same bad decision.

    Also note that the suggested feature would work similar to closure flags in this respect, which are automatically converted to close votes for 3 k users.

  • An easy way to implement this would probably be to rescale delete votes and have them work like close votes: Allow 2 k users to cast delete votes on answers, double the weight of delete votes from 20 k users on answers and require six or seven delete votes to remove an answer. Auto-cast delete votes on VLQ/NAA flags from such users and automatically enqueue posts with such votes.

  • 3
    Related post, which shows the problem at hand. – Patrick Hofman Jan 29 '16 at 12:30
  • How about we just remove VLQ altogether? It is almost universally misused and its proper use case is quite small. – ɥʇǝS Jan 29 '16 at 15:30
  • @ɥʇǝS: If this is about the flag, I am fully with you, but this is not important for this feature request. – Wrzlprmft Jan 29 '16 at 16:49
  • 1
    Super-narrow comment: "This deprives 2 k users of the ability to plainly send a post to the low-quality queue, which may be a good choice on rare occasions where you are unsure about a post due to lacking topic knowledge." - Sending a post to the low-quality queue when you lack knowledge is not a good idea. Flagging a post as low-quality when you lack knowledge to judge whether it is truly low-quality is not the right thing to do. So, I think this is a non-consideration: losing that is not a loss. – D.W. Jan 30 '16 at 5:22

At least for 20k users, I'd like to see a VLQ/NAA flag automatically cast a downvote from me (not from Community), and if the post becomes eligible for casting delete votes with that downvote, additionally cast a delete vote too. It's rather annoying to have to:

  1. Flag
  2. Downvote if score wasn't < 0, so that it becomes eligible for direct delete votes from me and others
  3. Refresh the page if the post score wasn't already < 0
  4. Then vote to delete

You must log in to answer this question.

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