Skip to main content

Timeline for Flag declined dude!

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 20, 2017 at 14:54 comment added Elder Geek @NonnyMoose I can only guess here, but it seems to me that the decline reason given might be construed as a mini-rant all by itself which in this case appears to have been construed as inappropriate for respectful discourse. After reviewing the ["answer" ](askubuntu.com/a/965683/225694) this is about, I agree that it doesn't belong here and it appears that the user who posted it isn't really experienced in the community. I think I would have left a comment pointing them to askubuntu.com/help/how-to-answer downvoted and moved on.
Oct 19, 2017 at 18:24 comment added Nonny Moose Why is everyone downvoting this? Just because he is the one who went against the OP doesn't mean he was wrong. This answer explains exactly why the flag was declined, and why he said what he did. You shouldn't care that he is complaining about two hours of sleep, either — it is still the reason he responded in the tone that he did!
Oct 18, 2017 at 17:41 comment added Thomas Ward Mod @EliahKagan meta.askubuntu.com/a/15833/10616 may suggest otherwise.
Oct 18, 2017 at 17:34 comment added Eliah Kagan Thanks for responding to some of the concerns in my comment. "I believe that such rants are valid use cases, in my opinion, for "Rude or Abusive" on the grounds that it doesn't warrant respectful discourse." The words "inappropriate for respectful discourse" in the flagging dialog aren't about anyone's opinion. They link to the "be nice" policy, so clearly they indicate that the posts that violate that policy are what the "rude or abusive" flag is for. That doesn't mean your position is wrong. But I don't think the explanation you've given holds water.
Oct 18, 2017 at 16:12 history edited Thomas WardMod CC BY-SA 3.0
added 173 characters in body
Oct 18, 2017 at 16:06 history answered Thomas WardMod CC BY-SA 3.0