# Why have mods "agree" to flag but still "keep post"?

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/why-have-mods-agree-to-flag-but-still-keep-post/83109>\
**Category:** UX\
**Created:** [3월 15, 2018, 9:32오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/why-have-mods-agree-to-flag-but-still-keep-post/83109 "2018-03-15T21:32:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![wolftune](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/wolftune/32/103569_2.png) [@wolftune](https://meta.discourse.org/u/wolftune)\
**Post date:** [3월 15, 2018, 10:02오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/why-have-mods-agree-to-flag-but-still-keep-post/83109/3 "2018-03-15T22:02:25Z")

</div>

In our case, from the testing we did, the _admin_ user who originally flagged also cannot flag again (surprising since you’d think the admin can do anything). Other than that clarification, all you say makes sense.

In fact, I very much support flexible uses of tags. Hence, this topic a ux question to understand how and why people do other things than what I’d thought of.

> Not all flags are negative in nature

Sure, but in that view (which I like), making flags a bad-mark against a user isn’t desirable, is it?

I still have the question: after “agree” + “keep post”, what benefit to anyone has occurred? For instance, is this helpful somehow in marking a topic to split?

EDIT: I forgot that marking “disagree” on a flag can be a bad mark against the flagger! We wouldn’t want that… so maybe this exists to basically clear the post without that?

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/why-have-mods-agree-to-flag-but-still-keep-post/83109)._