I got some 'splainin' to do

September 19, 2011 8:39 AM

Pony request: Flag > Other > ???

I don't flag stuff very often, but, when I do, I find myself wishing there was an option to explain the choice of "other" for the reason.

Would it be possible to allow for a short, pithy explanation for the choice of "other"?

posted by Thorzdad to Feature Requests at 8:39 AM (30 comments total)

You're more than welcome to email us. Basically the flags are doing a quick "you need to look at this now/soon" or "you need to fix something" alert to us. The current mechanisms don't really allow for a place for us to read notes. Hit us up on Twitter or email/contact form if there's something that needs explication but hopefully this doesn't come up too frequently.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:41 AM on September 19, 2011 [1 favorite]

If you knew that the quantity of flags was more important than the specific reason, flag this comment.
posted by Plutor at 8:45 AM on September 19, 2011 [2 favorites]

I think one of the primary problems with flagging is that it seems to be used as both a "you need to look at this now/soon" and a guide to a sense of the communities feelings on a post/comment.

What do I do with a post I think is fantastic, but might need some active attention to get started off right? If the central purpose of flagging is really to bring attention to a thing that is happening perhaps a fill in the blank option would allow us to do that without judgement.

If this could be coded it should work with the current infrastructure for flag viewing, and I think might help us as a community, help you guys improve response times to fighty threads.
posted by Blasdelb at 8:52 AM on September 19, 2011

I think the flagging options are kind of messy. The difference between offensive, noise and derail is unclear. I think it's been discussed before. In any case, flagging works, even though those options aren't satisfying. So, FIAMO.
posted by theora55 at 8:58 AM on September 19, 2011 [2 favorites]

What do I do with a post I think is fantastic, but might need some active attention to get started off right?

Send us an email via the contact form. It's there for folks to get ahold of us, it's totally fine to use, and the default answer to most "I need to communicate something slightly complicated to the mods" dilemmas is just that: write us and let us know what's up.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:02 AM on September 19, 2011

I asked this question once. I liked the answer jessamyn gave over there more than the answer jessamyn gave over here, so I'm gonna link to that one and flag this one as "not the best jessamyn comment on flagging ever."

The best jessamyn comment on flagging ever.
posted by phunniemee at 9:08 AM on September 19, 2011 [6 favorites]

I can't be the only one who flags almost everything as 'other' because I can't often tell which category it should fall in exactly, can I?

For me 'other' could pretty much be replaced with jessamyn's suggestion from her previous comment:

"I will flag this instead of being a dick in the thread, but really, this sucks amirite"

I was so relieved the first time this came up and I realized that I wasn't getting graded by which flagging category I used. As with many other topics in Metatalk, this probably say much more about me than the site.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:29 AM on September 19, 2011 [2 favorites]

I was so relieved the first time this came up and I realized that I wasn't getting graded by which flagging category I used.

This is the turmoil of Metafilter. We're being graded, but we never get to see our grades.
posted by roll truck roll at 9:41 AM on September 19, 2011 [2 favorites]

This is the turmoil of Metafilter. We're being graded, but we never get to see our grades.

I thought that's what favorites were for?
A++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++WOULD READ COMMENT FROM AGAIN!!!
posted by phunniemee at 9:50 AM on September 19, 2011 [1 favorite]

I don't think I've ever flagged anything as anything other than other.
posted by dirtdirt at 10:50 AM on September 19, 2011

Speaking of flagging, what's with the slow-rolling self-linkers today? If you wait six years to make a self post you deserve at least a gold-plated banhammer.
posted by villanelles at dawn at 11:31 AM on September 19, 2011 [2 favorites]

Speaking of flagging, what's with the slow-rolling self-linkers today?

It is a weird sort of accomplishment, yeah.

My theory is that what happens is that e.g. a senior editor at the Guardian tweets about a post and that ends up getting retweeted a billion times and somebody who has had an account for years but never uses it is all like "Metafilter! I think I have an account there, maybe I can get my sheet ubertweeted!" and they log in and take three quick dumps if they haven't commented already and they self-link and we ban them.

Or something like that.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:54 AM on September 19, 2011

Basically the flags are doing a quick "you need to look at this now/soon" or "you need to fix something" alert to us.

It is pretty funny when the purpose and response are completely opposite.

For example, this crappy noisy comment that would have helped langaugehat decide to leave if he hadn't already not really gone. Yet the whiner gets their wish granted, instead of deletion with disdain.

And yes, I know my flag came after mod action was already taken. Perhaps the comment should have been deleted along with the link? Also, there were other comments in that thread that deserved deletion as noise too, but as per requested usage, I only flagged the first one. Hell, on quick scan, some comments may have been deleted over there....

The entire post probably should have been nixed, actually. But anyway, all this is just to point out that the whole "flag reasons don't really count" thing is pretty confusing.
posted by Chuckles at 12:12 PM on September 19, 2011

We left a note in the thread that said we took the action suggested by the commenters. As a result, since we try to err on the side of fewer deletions, we left that one there. I didn't see it as crappy as much as just misplaced. Should have dropped us a note. Honestly, my take is that's really not the thing that was making languagehat all hot under the collar.

We deleted one comment from that thread which was someone telling someone else to STFU.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:25 PM on September 19, 2011

I really think there should be an option to flag as trolling. I've seen some fake anonymous questions that seem to exist for no reason other than to stir up grar.
posted by 2bucksplus at 12:34 PM on September 19, 2011

Flogging. That's whats missing.
posted by Sailormom at 12:38 PM on September 19, 2011

How about a "Weak Sauce" option, then?
posted by Thorzdad at 12:43 PM on September 19, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm not a huge fan of the status quo, where the flag options aren't very good, but it doesn't matter since the mods mainly ignore them.
posted by smackfu at 1:35 PM on September 19, 2011

My theory is that what happens is that e.g. a senior editor at the Guardian tweets about a post and that ends up getting retweeted a billion times

Is the @MetaFilter account actually owned by Matt? It might be nice to use it as an official Twitter account for site news, notable posts, sidebared stuff, etc.
posted by auto-correct at 1:40 PM on September 19, 2011

I don't think I've ever flagged anything as anything other than other.

I always flag things as "Other: This Comment May Seem Benign and Nice and All, But It Knows Perfectly Well What The Fuck It Did!" but since that's last isn't a listed option, I have to keep it as a part of my internal monologue.
posted by quin at 1:47 PM on September 19, 2011 [1 favorite]

Is the @MetaFilter account actually owned by Matt?

I don't think so, don't think so. We have a few official site accounts, for tweeting about new posts and sidebar entries, we could probably do to create an FAQ item about those.
posted by cortex (staff) at 2:05 PM on September 19, 2011

phunniemee: "I asked this question once. I liked the answer jessamyn gave over there more than the answer jessamyn gave over here, so I'm gonna link to that one and flag this one as "not the best jessamyn comment on flagging ever."

The best jessamyn comment on flagging ever."

-WTF That's the one we need.
posted by Splunge at 3:19 PM on September 19, 2011

where the flag options aren't very good, but it doesn't matter since the mods mainly ignore them.

No. We. Don't.

I'm not sure what you're referring to specifically, but we spend the bulk of our full-time days paying attention to the flag queue and making decisions about what to do based largely on it. This is a lightly-moderated site, meaning that most things are permitted, a few things aren't and some things will get you kicked off the site. This is the way the site has pretty much always been and if what you're saying is that you'd like the site to be different, please consider doing something that doesn't just sound like ankle-biting and make a proposal for how you would like it to be different.

If there is a way to parse your comment that isn't either a) performance art or b) calling us liars I'd appreciate if someone would clue me in to it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:52 PM on September 19, 2011

I read it as that you ignore which particular flag [besides fantastic and maybe HTML error] is used, and just use if and how often something has been flagged [ie, what Plutor said in the 2nd comment]
posted by radicarian at 6:03 PM on September 19, 2011

I just want the itchy typo flag because I secretly hope that one day a breakdown of who uses which flag categories the most will come out, and on that day I will astound my friends and family by not being in the top 2% of all typo flaggers.

Also typos really do make me itchy, especially my own.
posted by SMPA at 7:06 PM on September 19, 2011

I read it as that you ignore which particular flag...

Now that I have had a cookie, that is clearly a more charitable reading, sorry smackfu.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:16 PM on September 19, 2011 [1 favorite]

I could have been clearer, no worries.
posted by smackfu at 4:37 AM on September 20, 2011

If it's the count that matters, not the content, then maybe it makes sense to not have a flagging reason at all (ie. something is either Flagged or normal, like with the Favorites).
posted by togdon at 7:33 AM on September 20, 2011

cortex: Is the @MetaFilter account actually owned by Matt?

I don't think so, don't think so. We have a few official site accounts, for tweeting about new posts and sidebar entries, we could probably do to create an FAQ item about those.

I think the only official Mefi Twitter account is @mefi, the sideblog list. There are several unofficial accounts, which I sort of dislike for flooding the hashtags like #mefi.

You could probably get @metafilter if you asked politely. For the sideblog account, you might look into using mefi.us as the shortener.
posted by Pronoiac at 4:05 PM on September 20, 2011

jessamyn: "[...] This is a lightly-moderated site, [...]"

Was there an essay or post or interview somewhere with the moderation philosophy and advice on how to be a good moderator? I am a moderator in a place that is not very active, and I've been moderator on mailing lists that are. I want to reread the essay that I read or am confabulating that I read for when I need the advice.

Also, I've wanted to be able to have alittle text field for when I flag other. I have flagged my own comment other before because I accidentally the whole in the wrong post.
posted by bleary at 6:32 AM on September 23, 2011