0

When a post is flagged as rude or abusive, how are the flags handled? More specifically, is it based on latest edited text of the post as of review time, or on the original text?

| |
  • In other words, if a rude/abusive flag is denied, should it be parsed as "moderator looked at the post and it's OK by now" or "moderator looked at the post and it was never worthy of flagging, even before being edited into better state". But I figured the way the question is worded is more useful to larger audience. – user4012 Sep 21 '17 at 16:43
  • 1
    Unfortunately, other than comparing timestamps, we don't have an easy way of knowing that a flag refers to an earlier revision. – yannis Sep 21 '17 at 16:51
  • @yannis - as in, it's review time based? (I was assuming the edit history is examined as well) – user4012 Sep 21 '17 at 17:27
  • @user4012 Usually, when I decline a flag, I consider the post as is. Whether or not the post use to be flag worthy isn't something I actively look for, but if circumstances make it clear to me that the post was flag-worthy at the time it was flagged, I'd probably mark the flag as helpful(and do nothing) – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica Sep 21 '17 at 17:32
  • @SamIam - is that personal preference or moderation rule? – user4012 Sep 21 '17 at 17:33
  • @user4012 there is no "rule" I know of that compels me one way or another, but when I do decline a flag that that was valid at the time it was made, I'd consider that to be a mistake. – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica Sep 21 '17 at 17:36

Browse other questions tagged .