8

From network wide guides on flagging it is recommended to flag such posts as rude or abusive. To make the best out of our anti-spam protection system please do not use the spam flag on these posts. Also see: What are the “spam” and “rude or abusive” (offensive) flags, and how do they work?


6

That's spam. It doesn't attempt to answer the question, and only serves to advertise the service.


3

Arguments are fueled by passion, so you'll naturally have a somewhat different perspective than the third party mediator you call upon for resolution when you've been involved in one. Moderators are unbiased third parties that arrive to the scene, look at the events that took place and then make the most objective call that they can from the limited amount ...


3

Second, it is useful... probably I will hire one of them. I couldn't even imagine that it is possible so cheaply. I don’t know about this particular service, but spam is often not only unsolicited, but also false advertisement.


2

Whenever we see an answer which is wrong, misleading, just a copy of an existing answer, or not an answer at all, we have the option to: edit it to improve it. downvote it. (requires 125 reputation on a beta site) vote to delete it. (requires downvotes and 4k reputation on beta sites) Flag it for moderator attention for deletion or conversion to a comment. ...


2

Whenever we see poor content we can do the following: Leave a comment to ask for improvement. Edit the post to remove poor content or add missing details. Downvote to let other users see that this post is not helpful. Only after we had unsuccessfully taken these steps we may need to flag the post for moderator attention. Please keep in mind that not all of ...


2

Creating offensive posts is considered a strong misconduct on Stack Exchange. If a post receives six offensive flags or is considered offensive by a moderator, the respective user loses 100 reputation. If I recall correclty, comments are different, however: You can post as many offensive comments as you like without receiving an automatic penalty. However, ...


2

I quote from Shog9's post on Meta Stack Exchange: Why don't we treat rubbish the same as spam? This is an utter waste of time. There is no meaning to the post! It's VLQ, it's abuse, it's Not An Answer, heck it might even be a spammer, testing the waters... There's no metric you can apply that'll narrow that down, because there is no meaningful content to ...


1

AFAIR, I recently flagged such a post about one week ago, and I think I flagged it as "in need of moderator attention", because the other titles didn't match. I don't see the content being rude or abusive. Of course one could argue, that that making such a post is abusive to the platform, but on this meta level, every flagging reason is meanwhile abusive ...


1

99 % of my comment flags are obsolete or include a custom message to the mods to tell them why certain comments are obsolete (after a mod once told me that obsolete comments are the hardest to judge). The remaining percent is for those comments that are spam or offensive — but the former is very, very rare (haven’t used a spam comment flag yet, to the best ...


1

As to my knowledge, deleted posts are clearly identified by a coloured frame, I think what you could do at the back end is disabling flagging of deleted posts or, on the front end, somehow improving the know-how of handling such cases among advanced users, e.g. by popping up tooltips. In my opinion, the former would be the more reliable solution ;-)


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