@TheAmplitwist The OP of Should a custom flag be used instead of the “not an answer” flag when the answer isn't a blatant non-answer? responded to my ping helpfully with a link to a source regarding the amount of delay before NAA flags are sent to the moderator queue.

> Very Low Quality and Not An Answer flags do not enter the moderator queue for 15 minutes after they're raised. This applies network-wide, except on Stack Overflow, Mathematics, TeX, Salesforce and Stack Overflow em Português (where the delay is a full hour) and meta sites (where they enter the queue immediately).

So, it seems that for our site it takes not 15 minutes, but 1 hour, before the NAA flags are sent to the moderators for review.

Just pinging the participants in the earlier discussion for the update (my apologies if this is intrusive): @TheSimpliFire @ArcticChar

Perhaps Martin Sleziak would also be interested, but I think they are not pingable in this room at the moment.

I'll just add that the post linked above goes on to give some guidance as follows:

> This delay gives the community a chance to handle these flags first. If that doesn't happen, or if it can't happen, then it is made available to moderators for resolution. Keep in mind, not all posts can be processed via review, and when a post is processed through review but continues to garner flags the system reserves these for moderators. Therefore, when you do see these flags in the mod queue, you should handle them - it's unlikely anyone else will.

By my reading of the above, it seems that the decline reason "flags should only be used to make moderators aware of content that requires their intervention" (mentioned by TheSimplifire and Arctic Char) is out of place. Of course, my knowledge of the moderator queue is limited, so perhaps one of our moderators could clarify.

@XanderHenderson: Can you or another moderator clear a few of my pending flags? I'm getting a warning just because I flagged some crankery but it was declined...

@TheAmplitwist NAA, LOW QUALITY, flags, put reg., ole' users in a catch 22. We flag as such not to bother mods, but a mod, handles it anyway, it's declined. I really think we are caught in a damned if you do, damned if you don't. We could all stick strictly to votes to close, reopen, to delete, undelete, and save matters not address for flagging for moderator attention. Mods than pass on flags not for moderator attention, and given how slowly flags for mod attention are handled, they ought not

This issue is a joke, because mods ought not handle flags not "for moderator attention" until, and only handling all outstanding flags designated "for moderator attention. I think there is likely gaming in moderation, where one's flag handling is measured by cliearing flags, so of course, they going to steer clear of handling "for mod attention" flags, and go down the list with "decline, "click custom reason", to show a modicum of contribution.

Unfortunately, this puts blame on users, not on the lazy mods doing that.

Reviewers of low quality posts, close votes, etc., are hundreds more than are the mods that handle flags. Mods, let us do that work, and you do your work.

Mind you, I know there are mods that handle strictly flags for mod attention. But it would help to have mod-to-mod peer pressure to classify "for mod attention" flags as first and foremost the handling scope of mods.