Should we stop using VLQ?

[jdd-software]

The VLQ is a strange flag that sometimes does not desired stuff (it get's cleared by OP when it should not, it auto down-votes even if good edit).

Should we stop using this flag? (hence change also in Natty Reporter?).

Do note that link only answer by Shog9 are considered NAA see https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/225370/your-answer-is-in-another-castle-when-is-an-answer-not-an-answer

So let me be clear: this sort of response is not an answer.

and since we have Generic bot tracking edits the feature of auto-clearing flags are just a mess.

Furthermore we do know that mods do not make any difference between these flags (lost of meta posts, including Tuna's FR)

For some discussion in chat see from https://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/message/40943898#40943898

[FelixSFD]

I like the VLQ-flags for link-only answers. Since we leave a comment, many users are improving their answer which clears the flag. Flagging NAA raises the chance of getting a declined flag, even with Generic Bot

[jdd-software]

@FelixSFD but if they improve you also leave a downvote? I almost prefer declined flag then the system leaving down votes on stuff that maybe I can't even judge

[FelixSFD]

@jdd-software I don't downvote many link-only posts. Only when the user edits it without improving it

[jdd-software]

@FelixSFD hmm?, the community user downvote it for you if you flag VLQ and they edit.... That is what I mean, I don't like that effect.

[GrumpyCrouton]

@jdd-software Wait, that doesn't make sense to me. Why would it auto downvote a question just because it was flagged at VLQ and it was edited? Wouldn't you assume that when OP edits a VLQ post that it would become better?

[BaumMitAugen]

@jdd-software I've never heard of that auto downvote and thus never considered it as a factor in this discussion.

Without taking that into account, I do like the VLQ flag for LO. Fixed VLQ-posts are not exactly rare.

Iirc, the original version by Nobody Nada used to NAA flag everything, which promptly left me with disputed flag due to an edit, which also happened to Floern I think, so I changed it to VLQ.

I think we should keep it. Just learned how that auto-downvote works, not so sure anymore. For the flagger, VLQ is more convenient, but leaving around down-votes on stuff I don't understand does not really feel right...

[jdd-software]

https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/236883/community-downvotes-posts-that-were-just-fixed?noredirect=1&lq=1

crazy or not crazy that is how it works

[Floern]

I'll stick to the VLQ flag, because it gets cleared on an edit. I don't care much about the auto-downvote. Sure, it's somewhat off when the post is significantly improved, but I can revert that with an upvote. And if the post is still bad it gets one more downvote.

In the end it's up to you what flag you use.

[GrumpyCrouton]

I think the issue that @jdd-software mentions is really a non-issue, as Shog9 said in the answer on the post that jdd posted:

The system will now revoke the automatic downvote if, after the flag is marked Helpful, the post later gets an upvote.
https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/266436/360627

In that case, I say that we should keep the VLQ flag. I don't think any other flag really makes sense.

[jdd-software]

Since we have different ideas, my conclusion is that there is no current need to modify the userscript globally (single users can easily change this line according to their preference).

If in the future a config dialog is built into the script, this issue can be considered.