Linked Questions

Somebody asked the following “question”: Clearly this is just a troll post so I (and other users) flagged it as spam. The spam flag was subsequently disputed (which I think simply means that a ...

MERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR <3 doingdoingdoingdoingdoingdoingdoingdoingdoing. 9.... YEAH baby. Shash. BOSH. :)) What this post would normally receive on its own is 8 "not an answer" flags,...

This really caught my attention. As you can below this photo, there's user (Maybe a person or maybe bot) answered the question but it is not answer the question. So is this person just a pure troll ...

A few minutes ago, an answer appeared to one of my questions, blatantly not an answer, but somehow it wasn't detected and filtered by SE itself. Also, the user has been posting this on other questions ...

I am wondering which flag to raise upon catching sight of something like this: Asdfghjkl lkjhgfdsa Spam? It's not promoting anything. Rude or abusive? It's not speaking ill of anything. Not an ...

When flagging, there are two special case options: spam and rude or abusive. What is spam, and when should I flag content as such? What is considered offensive, rude or abusive content? How does the ...

Currently, flagging a post as very low quality causes two things to happen: The post is flagged for moderator review The community user casts a downvote on the post if the flag is validated ...

The Very Low Quality flag option sucks. prepares for controversy I'd like to see it removed totally as a flag option. Its original purpose was as a response to contentless or meaningless posts; ...

I was recently very surprised about the expected workflow for low-quality posts when stumbling across the Meta Post Am I reviewing correctly?. It would be nice if the guidelines, as discussed in ...

On more than one occasion, across different sites of the network, I have raised the "very low quality" flag. Apparently, a few mods (it came out while discussing after the fact) are unaware that this ...

The last few days seem to have seen the resurgence of some old conflicts on Stack Overflow. In particular there have been attempts to delete some old and popular but non-technical questions(*) and a ...

As per the FAQ, we know that there are two small differences between spam flags and rude or abusive flags (referred to below as S and R/A, respectively). If a deleted post has at least 1 valid spam ...

The description of the "it is offensive, abusive, or hate speech" flag is this: This answer contains content that a reasonable person would deem inappropriate for respectful discourse. However, ...

There's been some consternation about the new flagging, but I wanted to focus on the syntax for a moment. I think the current shift doesn't really fix anything and it seems to fall into the same trap ...

For flag > spam, the description is as follows: This answer is effectively an advertisement with no disclosure. It is not useful or relevant, but promotional. This is good for a post such as ...