I handled that, so I'll tell you why I did what I did:
It's on topic here.
It might also be on topic at Unix & Linux, it might even be more on topic at Unix & Linux (for the sake of argument, say), but at the end of the day, since it's on-topic here, there's just no good reason to move it.
There is a fair bit of overlap between some of the Stack ...
I prefer that a relatively well worded but completely wrong answer remain but be downvoted so that future readers know that it is a Bad Thing. The more comments on the answer that explain why it's bad, the better.
I only flag answers that are:
Obviously shilling for a product.
Asking a question of the poster.
"Do not do it again" is an order (an imperative statement), not a threat. A threat would be "If you do it again, I'll come to your house with a cream pie and throw it into your face while shouting, 'Mit Schlag!'" Or some other statement that included potential consequences. Moderators are allowed to make imperative statements.
As for whether or not it'...
I don't see any outright insults here on the part of naktinis, at least as far as I would be insulted, but your comment was also completely unnecessary and outright wrong in the situation.
To recapitulate: The question was in a nutshell "how are these commands named, I forgot". The complete answer to this is nginx_ensite and nginx_dissite. The link Michael ...
I don't understand at all how anyone can consider this as rude or abusive.
It's not particulary helpful, that is true, but it's not rude and it's not abusive. You might have flagged this as "not an answer", but even that is not really true because the answer is factually correct - a disconnected system can't be attacked via the network.
Become a valuable ...
As it happens, someone else also flagged this answer, as "not an answer", before I came to read this post, and I handled it by converting the answer to a comment.
I have to agree with Sven that this answer doesn't rise to the level of rude and abusive. It doesn't even appear to be on the same continent.
I have to disagree, however, that it has any use as ...
I really don't see anything too specific about this question. It does seem to be written from the standpoint of a non-professional however:
I'm not convinced he knows what an ISO is from the question. In terms used in the close reasons, this falls somewhere between not demonstrating minimal knowledge of the system he's using, and the "professional" ...
A duplicate is a duplicate regardless of age.
It's true - more frequently newer questions are flagged as dupes of older questions, but in this case it wasn't appropriate.
The dupe question for yours is a canonical QA as to why one-click installer stacks (WAMP, XAMPP, etc.) are inappropriate in a professional sysadmin setting. HopelessN00b found your old ...
The flag declination was absolutely appropriate.
This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the
question. It should possibly be an edit, a comment, another question,
or deleted altogether
That is the flag reason you chose, and it's incorrect. The answer does attempt to answer the question. It may not be a high-quality answer, but ...
I didn't see this question, but I agree with leaving it on Server Fault. Here's why:
Our target audience is professional system and network administrators. At some point, most of us will have to learn more of how our operating system scheduler works than a simple hand-waving "it's smart, it multitasks" which may suffice for our non-technical users.
If it's an accepted answer, there's nothing we can do about it.
In that particular case, a self-accepted answer is 99.999% of the time always left alone, because only the op knows what fixed it.
It sucks that they didn't tell us what happened, but that's life.
Although this isn't actually what you asked, I may as well elaborate:
An accepted answer is ...
For what it's worth, I'd already voted to close it as off-topic, and although two respected moderators have said otherwise, I secretly continue to think it's off-topic, pretty much for the reasons you mentioned.
But I also think that's not a good reason to flag it. There's already a mechanism in place for regular off-topic questions; you vote-to-close, it ...
I was the mod who declined this flag. I tend to set a pretty high bar for accepting NAA flags, because I don't want to slam the door in someone's face for trying to answer a question, especially when here on ServerFault, we often try to answer the question people are really asking.
Digging deeper into the context of the (large and annoyingly repetitious) ...
Your post was closed as "Unclear what you're asking" because, at the time, it did not include a question. It was a statement.
Post-edit, there is now a question, however it is not one which is answerable by the standards of the site. We don't deal in "ideas", we deal in specific answers to specific, reproducible problems. There isn't enough information ...
I'd like to think the moderators only take flags as indicators that a post might need attention, and actually think about the specifics of the situation before acting on it... We don't have an overwhelming quantity of flags, so as long as you raise them in good faith it's no bother to us. If a flag doesn't get handled quickly, it's because there's no mods ...
First off you're right in that the question fails anything in a home setting and is therefore off topic for Sever Fault. Your flag was automagically handled by Community ♦, someone must have voted to close Off Topic and (I think) agreed with you.
The question itself being home use, Linux and media server probably falls into the overlap between U&L and ...
I declined the flag, precisely because it is on-topic here.
Typically if a post is cross-posted to multiple sites, it should be closed on the sites on which it is not on-topic. I'm a bit surprised that it wasn't closed on SO; that's not a topic I usually expect to see left open there. (But the presence of the bounty prevents people from voting to close it.)
Flag as mod attention, and just enter some descriptive text as to why you think it should be deleted. Otherwise, if we see "low quality" and that it's already closed, we're likely to dismiss the flag, as we don't always have the time to review the entire post contents; although that one would be pretty obvious.
I'd err on the side of bug for this one. I've been using the Stack Exchange sites for over a year now and this confused the heck out of me the other day. I can only imagine a relatively new user will be just as confused, if not more so.
The problem is that it looks like the options are disabled, not just a grey colour. I was flagging an answer the other day ...
I cleared that one. It was a close duplicate, but not an exact one. The asker needed a key piece of information that the dup-candidate didn't have, and that point-to-print is a client-side setting best handled through group policy. Which I then supplied in an answer, and then linked to the dup-candidate since those steps have already been written up.
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.
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 ...
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.
I would like to throw in my 2 cents here (I am sorry), as I get the feeling that people are talking past the posed question(s).
Talking past the question for a moment:
Let me pre-face it quickly by saying that I personally think this is all an exaggerated response. The moderators response was not overly harsh, and the way he perceives the comment is wholly ...