I find it strange that we cannot flag posts older than 7 Days as Very Low Quality.

I have read this answer from Shog9 and understand the reasonings for why the time limit was implemented in that current process.

Currently, when a question is older than 7 days and it receives a VLQ flag it bypasses Triage and goes directly to the moderators.

However, I don't think that was the best solution to the problem of

Sending too much noise to moderators

Would a solution of age not bypassing the triage system have been a better solution? As due to the time limit of the VLQ flag option the only feasible flag option for a post older than 7 days is to flag for "moderator attention" which is sending noise to the moderators anyway. So surely allowing old posts to still be flagged but not bypassing the review queues is a better approach? As this allows us mortal users to remove these posts ourselves and the moderators don't have to be be involved.

From discussions with ShadowWizard

  1. If we'll be able to flag old answers, it will flood the review queue.
  2. On smaller sites mods with.. ahem... spare time... can easily go through them and delete, but on SO(Stack Overflow)... there's just too many.
  1. Yes I understand the queues will probably initially spike due to more posts being able to be flagged, I think the benefits of removing Low Quality content outweighs the drawback in a spike in flags. And as is stands (for Stack Overflow, I do not have access to review in other sites but I suspect it is similar) the only queue that is in a high number is the Close Votes queue (but when is that never high) so I am confident there will be reviewer available to handle these.

  2. Low traffic on the other sites in the Stack Exchange network can be a factor the the quantity of low quality posts just due to the fact that some sites will get far more posts than others. So if a time limit on the ability to flag as VLQ is the preferred option could it be relative to the size of the site in question? As a one-size-fits-all approach isn't the way personally I would go about things, as with the high traffic of some of the sites the great work done by reviewers and the bots can miss things depending on when they were posted.

What is the general consensus on this?

  • 2
    I think you misread: VLQ going to moderators after 7 days wasn't put described as a solution to “Sending too much noise to moderators”. Shog9 describes it as one of the problems contributing to sending too much noise. However he also describes that it is a trivially small contributor because of how rarely someone raises a VLQ flag after 7 days. Commented Nov 6, 2018 at 12:14
  • 1
    @doppelgreener Yes I understand it was one of the problems contributing to too much noise, if my post came off as me not thinking it was one of the problems I apologise Commented Nov 6, 2018 at 12:50
  • Upon further discovery it appears answers on a question with an open bounty cannot be flagged as VLQ either Commented Nov 12, 2018 at 13:15

1 Answer 1


I think this is a good idea because,

  • Low quality things get missed the first time around, I have seen absolute garbage posts get left up for years and years.

  • The need to delete doesn't go away after a week and you can still raise NAA or spam or even mod flags or ask others in chat to vote to delete. Having the Low Quality flag available would make this simpler.

  • Some answers are enough of answers to not fit the NAA flag but are still low quality enough to be deleted but the flag options make this confusing since the NAA flag is the option you have.

Just because a week has passed doesn't mean something shouldn't be deleted, let's make it easier for the caretakers to delete old low quality posts.

  • Yes, all very good points, especially since there is still some VLQ content from the early days of Stack Overflow (years old), so not being able to flag as VLQ just makes the process of deleting them awkward Commented Nov 9, 2018 at 8:27

You must log in to answer this question.

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