Hot answers tagged

15

It definitely meets the criteria for spam on Stack Exchange: it "[e]xists only to promote a product or service." I can't imagine a moderator seeing the full picture would decline a spam flag, but I could see them missing it with just the flag and no explanation. I generally flag these as "in need of moderator intervention" and explain ...


11

Now in hindsight, I see how that may have come across as deeply offensive. The edit to my answer was the right thing to do. If I could have seen from the beginning that my answer had a rude/abusive flag on it, I could have acted early - possibly earlier than waiting for someone else to fix my post. I can't see the post in question or its edit history, but......


7

The existence or lack of a link is secondary. If the purpose of the post is to promote a service or product (or religion, mathematical proof, secret satanistic organization, etc etc etc) then it is spam. As a vague parallel, we see a fair amount of obvious spam where the spammer simply forgot to include the link, or botched the formatting badly. Not removing ...


5

Yes, it is definitely spam. As per the definition of the spam flag: Exists only to promote a product or service, does not disclose the author's affiliation. Since the purpose of the post is to promote a product, it is spam. According to this: Don't talk about your product / website / book / job too much. Folks will read your answers for their ability to ...


5

Any user who is able to flag can now flag comments authored by the Community user as no longer needed, per changes made here.


5

While I’m sure your response to seeing a red flag on your post would have been just to edit your post (somehow figuring out what exactly needed to be changed), I’m afraid that an all-too-common reaction would be for the poster to lash out with more abuse towards anyone who looks to have been involved. If a user isn’t worried about any backlash, then they can ...


2

It is not mentioned in the question, but this becomes really important for reviewing First Posts (or the new First Questions) or Triage queues when out of close votes. I was reviewing a first question which needed to be closed. As I am out of close votes, I was basically forced to skip (as "No action needed" is not applicable). This means I have to ...


2

This comment auto-deleted upon raising a "No longer needed" flag against it: I have summarized our findings in an answer, which you can accept if you think it solves your initial question. So I would suggest that accept (on its own) is also a dirty word. Indeed, this comment on an answer to Are comments which respond to another comment deleted by ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible