Remember, the answer you provide today is not just for the OP. It is for everyone else who happens to land on it via some search engine link or other method in the future.
Adding an explanation like you did here improves the answer considerably and makes it more useful to the OP and anyone else who might subsequently find it. It explains what caused the ...
The text says to include the essential parts of the answer. If the author of the answer does that and only that, it would fall under the fair use doctrine - see the U.S. Copyright Office's information on Fair Use. But if the author, as you say, copies and pastes a large portion of copyrighted text, presenting it as their own, that would be both legally and ...
As the moderator concerned, not that it really matters, but at the time I was not yet elected.
Second I made that edit when that answer popped up in First Posts review queue where one only sees such an answer in isolation. As a matter of routine I improved the formatting some and removed what appeared a typical first time user trying to sign an answer ...
It appears that a moderator missed the fact that this post was a copy of another answer, with "Thanks" appended.
I won't speak for him, but I will say that in response to some flags I deleted the non-answer several days ago.
First off: Flagging link only answers is the correct thing to do.
You may also edit the answer if you're so inclined.
Second opinions can differ but in this specific Q & A I would most likely have declined the flag too, because :
The answer is 5 years old
Not every old Q & A is worth judging to current standards.
The answer is Accepted by the ...
First off, these are really old question and answers, which makes inertia important (It is not useful to pick through everything in our history for stuff that no longer fits with our current viewpoints).
Regardless, the first answer does have another answer than the links it posts:
The questions you're asking are answered in the hier(7) man page.
Just for completeness, I declined both of these flags because:
In both cases, the answers could easily be improved by editing them, and this is not something you need a moderator for. Also they stand well enough on their own, that even if the links went dead they would still be useful. Iain has covered these points pretty well, so I won't belabor them.
You yourself can't.
But moderators can. You should be able to flag your own question for moderator attention:
in need of moderator intervention
A problem not listed above that requires action by a moderator. Be specific and detailed!
Please be aware that questions older than 30 days can't be migrated and we'll not always honour such requests ...
The types of posts that NAA is for are things like commentary on the question or another answer, "I'm having this problem too", asking another unrelated question, random waffle, and complete gibberish. The vast majority of valid NAA flags are for posts by people treating SF as a forum, rather than a QA site. The flag name is "Not An Answer", not "Wrong ...
Both of those answers are valid and will remain valid even if the links go dead, all someone has to do is go looking based on the information provided.
They are absolutely answers and should not have been flagged NAA.
There are lost of things you could have done with out flagging ...
You could have gone looking and found an online version of the hier(7) ...
As Mark's answer says, the bounty won't be awarded because you haven't awarded it, you haven't selected the answer as being correct, and the answer isn't at +2.
As for the not an answer flags, I dismissed one, another moderator did the other one. Although I can understand why it was flagged, when a moderator is handling the flag, choosing "Decline" makes ...
You have all the tools you need to deal with this on a case by case basis yourself.
If an answer is useless then simply downvote it.
You could also consider protecting the question to stop it from being used in a similar manner in the future.
Beyond that, there is likely little that can be done.
You don't have to award a bounty, and I don't believe that currently the answer meets the criteria for the bounty being awarded automatically.
From What is a bounty? How can I start one? in Server Fault Help:
If you do not award your bounty within 7 days (plus the grace period), the highest voted answer created after the bounty started with a minimum ...
One of those did show up as a low quality review. I voted Looks OK, because the question asked where an explanation can be found and the proper answer to that question is a link. And I don't know any better answer to that question, than the first of the two links provided.
It's been proposed any number of times to allow moderators to accept an answer on behalf of a user. This has also been shot down the same number of times.
The rationale is that accepting an answer is meant to indicate which answer was most useful to the person asking the question, while community consensus as to the "best" answer is expressed through votes.