Timeline for Why was my not constructive flag declined?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:29 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Aug 4, 2016 at 14:14 | vote | accept | Rainbolt | ||
| Mar 30, 2016 at 13:15 | comment | added | Rainbolt | Okay, thanks for expanding your answer to include an explanation. I wasn't offended by the comment - I flag comments like these so that future readers don't have to parse through a bunch of useless information to find what they are looking for. My comment helps readers find the answer. The other comment does not. I hope mods recognize the difference between the two comments, and react with more granularity than "Keep all the comments." or "Nuke all the comments." | |
| Mar 30, 2016 at 9:24 | history | edited | freekvd | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 450 characters in body
|
| Mar 30, 2016 at 4:53 | comment | added | freekvd | @Rainbolt I answered your first question, "was raising a flag the right thing to do?" Yes it was. I first speculated about how the mod might have looked at the whole comment discussion instead of just the one you flagged, but since that's speculation I left that out. Would like to hear that from the mod in question. | |
| Mar 30, 2016 at 0:44 | comment | added | Rainbolt | This does not answer the question, but it might if you add an explanation as to why I should have used a different type of flag. Regarding the second paragraph, posting links to Google along with a constructive argument is considered acceptable. The real problem with my comment is that it was not phrased in the nicest way possible - something I have taken note of and will attempt to improve. | |
| Mar 29, 2016 at 22:23 | history | answered | freekvd | CC BY-SA 3.0 |