@amWhy I am not sure I understand. But: Vote to delete is close enough to a spam flag that I am not sure it's even necessarily worth it to leave to queue. In any case I think one should also vote to delete. Come to think of it, somewhere on the main meta there are posts on why there is no flag option in the queue.
Spam posts, without proper context, especially those tricky ones, can be extremely difficult to assess; and even when you successfully identify it as "spam" the review queue doesn't allow you to flag it as such, hence there isn't a correct action in the Low Quality Review Queue when seeing spam o...
That's usually my gut instinct, in the review queue, but not necessarily out of the review queue. I just wish the review queue would be more consistent, or in keeping with, how one should respond in general, not about learning how to behave in the low quality review queue. Period.
But I really do appreciate the input, @quid. Thanks!
Voting is one of the main components of SE communities. While surfing or reviewing posts I am eager to vote on them.
Answering is also one of the main components. Flagging's gotten pretty big too. But neither of these are available in the current review queues.
Note that you can't close or...
Or something close to that.
You are welcome @amWhy I never really thought about this. I'll keep it in mind.
Actually, the first link is much closer to my concern, whether tricky or obvious. There is no option to designate what is clearly spam, as spam. When one clicks on "delete" the list of "reasons for deleting" doesn't include any appropriate option for deleting because of spam. The only thing I've done is click the "no comment" reason.
And, almost inevitably, I click on the question, open in another tab, see if it's an audit, and if not, flag what seems to be clearly spam. But that really doesn't happen often. So I guess it's no big deal.
@quid, and thanks for searching for/finding those posts!
@MartinSleziak Oh, wow, @MartinSleziak. Indeed, a new thread is called for. The current thread, with that number of answers seems to have become a bit unwieldy. So I entirely support the birth of another "reopen/undelete" thread, as you suggest.
I am aware that basically anybody can do this.
The reason I am bringing this up in the mods' office is that for threads like that it would probably be reasonable to request dissociation of the post from the user account. (Well, unless the OP explicitly wants to be notified about each new reopen request posted there.)
IIRC mods cannot do this, but still moderators are more often in contact with the SE staff/CMs, so they are in better position to get this done.
After all, if the post is going to be dissociated/anonymized (whatever is the right terminology), then it really does not matter who posts it. (I suppose that as a result of this everything connecting the OP's account and the post is removed, so it does not count toward badges, is not shown in the users profile, etc.)
Although I notice that the current thread still has an owner (they also have a few badges for that post). So I am not really sure whether the reopen requests threads used to be anonymized.
But I distinctly recalled that this was done on some posts. Was it only for sandboxes?
Note also, @quid, @user21820 This conversation from yesterday: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/71849 Note, I post this only to add additional information, perhaps not helpful.
Voting is one of the main components of SE communities. While surfing or reviewing posts I am eager to vote on them.
Answering is also one of the main components. Flagging's gotten pretty big too. But neither of these are available in the current review queues.
Note that you can't close or...
