If I remember it correctly, unsuccessfully flagged regular posts appear explicitly in my flagging history, (marked as declined) and a message is left by the person who handled it, saying why the flag is declined.

This seems not to happen for declined flags on comments.

How can I learn why a comment flag is declined?

| |
  • $\begingroup$ It just picks me when random people leave very unconstructive and scornful comments on legitimate questions (that indeed get very nice answers from the experts here), and the disruptive comment gets even upvoted (whereas my flag as "not constructive" gets declined)... :-( $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 4 '12 at 15:32
  • $\begingroup$ IIRC, comment flags add to your count, but they won't show up in the list and they have a different effect on flag weight. $\endgroup$ – Manishearth Nov 4 '12 at 16:59

IIRC, comment flags add to your count, but they're not explicitly displayed in your flag list*. Furthermore, there is no option for mods to put a decline reason-- there's just a dialog asking "helpful?" or something similar. So, to find out what happened, your best bet would be to ask a mod :/

*not only that, they're a bit masked on the mod side as well--certain comment flags are anonymous, and they show up with less details in the post flags page

| |
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah thanks for these explanations Manishearth, it is probably ok generally as it is. The particular case picks me because it gives the impression that it is ok here on Physics SE to attack legitimate questions about serious (fundamental) physics by very scornful comments. I just thought such a thing should not be (and is not) allowed here ... :-/ $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 4 '12 at 17:56
  • $\begingroup$ @Dilaton hm... I would think it shouldn't be. Could you link to the comment in question, or to the post it was made on? $\endgroup$ – David Z Nov 4 '12 at 21:02
  • $\begingroup$ Hi @DavidZaslavsky, it was the first comment below this question. In my opinion it is quite disruptive and even wrong, as Qmechanic explains in his answer. There are serious people working with theories that potentially have that feature and they get quite a nice phenomenology out of it. So the fitst commenter is wrong by saying the question is completely off the mark (even if it is not a stellar question). $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 5 '12 at 10:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Dilaton that is not scornful or rude. You may have a point about it being wrong, but unfortunately wrongness does not justify any moderator action (such as deleting comments). $\endgroup$ – David Z Nov 5 '12 at 16:34
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidZaslavsky ok, scornful or rude is probably too strong a statement. But I still think this comment is (apart from wrong) not constructive, and that is what I wanted to express with my flag. Does it mean that if I ask a question say about, F-theory for example (or anything that is serious physics but disliked by certain people), I'll have to tolerate my question being attacked by this kind of not constructive comments and nothing can be done about it ...? $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 5 '12 at 19:53
  • $\begingroup$ @Dilaton Apparently so. SE doesn't want comments deleted without significant reasons. $\endgroup$ – David Z Nov 5 '12 at 21:52
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidZaslavsky ok never mind, if I want to know about too fundamental physics (which is unfortunately often target of similar and even much worse attacks) and it gets too bad with the attacks here too, I can still ask Lumo at TRF ... :-P. Since quite some time ago I started to be careful to not overdo it with some tags that have an increased probability to trigger such bad things :-D Cheers $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 5 '12 at 22:20
  • $\begingroup$ @Dilaton well, you can do whatever you want, but to me it seems rather silly to avoid contributing to this (or any) site just because other people are allowed to say that you're wrong. Just because they can say it doesn't make them right. Of course, if you view any such statement as an attack then this is probably not the site for you, but I would consider that being overly sensitive (and honestly I can't imagine TRF being any better). $\endgroup$ – David Z Nov 6 '12 at 0:02
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidZaslavsky hu? The issue is not about being told wrong but questions about serious and legitimate physics being attacked by not constructive comments such as "this is not physics", "this has nothing to do with the real world, why are you asking"ect, and worse. That's why I have stopped for example to ask about BSM physics at Prof. Strasslers sites. See for example how the comment section is immediatele turned into a non constructive tohuwabohu if he tries to write about too fundamental STuff here. $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 6 '12 at 5:59
  • $\begingroup$ ... And I always hold my breath if somebody else asks about to "risky" things in the comments over there. I just thought people and their questions about legitimate physics are generally some kind of protected against being spammed by not constructive and disruptive comments on this site. $\endgroup$ – Dilaton Nov 6 '12 at 6:12
  • $\begingroup$ let us continue this discussion in chat $\endgroup$ – David Z Nov 6 '12 at 6:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .