4

Today I saw these two questions. They are IMHO very low quality/effort ones, but may be "fixed" with a few comments and right response from OPs. But looking at them together, they are two variants of the same thing, with the same wrong assumptions yet comming from two different (new) users. If it were the same user for both I would just let them be or suggest closing if no edits were made, but this looks fishy. Should I flag both questions or should I evaluate each one separately?

5

Using public information, you can see:

  • The identicons are the same
  • Both users were created today
  • Both are unregistered

So it is reasonable to assume there is some sort of connection, and might well be the same user. When you see a low quality post that can be salvaged, you can do one or more of:

  • Vote down
  • Vote to close
  • Comment to constructively suggest improvements or request additional information

Flagging the question Very Low Quality would likely be declined in both cases, because they are not obvious candidates for immediate deletion. If the intention is to close (not delete), the correct option would be to vote to close (or flag 'should be closed because...').

VLQ

Your other option is to flag for moderator attention:

Mod

This would be fine as well, so long as you are "specific and detailed". The key point is to mention the thing that requires action by a moderator. Now that option could simply be to check for anything "fishy" (but be more specific than that). In this case, I would probably mark the flag as helpful, and leave a comment inviting the user to register, then merge their accounts.

To finish, if it were me, I would have:

  • Edited the question to improve formatting/spelling/tags etc.
  • Voted down if the end result was still "unclear or not useful"
  • Commented constructively
  • Voted/flagged to start the community close review process
  • Flagged a moderator to look into the apparent connection between the two users

See also What if I see someone doing something bad?

  • 1
    Thank you for a very detailed answer. And for the work you are doing here. – jkavalik May 4 '16 at 14:55
  • I became suspicious after seeing meta.stackoverflow.com/a/322115 and today dba.stackexchange.com/q/137468 and dba.stackexchange.com/q/137501 were added.. But maybe I am just being paranoid. – jkavalik May 4 '16 at 15:37
  • 2
    No, not at all paranoid. It's not the same issue (one that has wasted several hours of my time recently, as it happens) but that would be one of those times where a custom flag would have been quite appropriate. On the broader point: there's not much to stop people creating unregistered accounts to ask low quality questions, but they'll get bored eventually, or we'll take action if it becomes too disruptive. That time is rapidly approaching in this case :) – Paul White May 4 '16 at 23:18

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .