Since MSE posts frequently hit 100+, this seems to be a problem.    The "What is a disputed flag?" post has a score of 157.  The highest rated question here currently has a score of 1341, so in fixing this you should probably make it safe for at least 4 character scores.  Alternatively, you could show scores in base 64.
29960
The score for the 4 questions are 111, 1218, 261 and 5 respectively, but they display 2 digits per line. This is an obvious bug in design.
30345
I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked flag again and found this:    Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:    Note: There are several similar questions:       The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised.
68675
Looks like a text inconsistency to me:   Spam flags are Helpful Other flags are helpful
67973
I flagged  five days ago because it seems off-topic to me. The question has been closed by a moderator few minutes after.  However my flag has not been marked as helpful (or declined, or disputed) in my flags summary page. It's just like the flag has not been taken into account (screenshot below).    Is a moderator can explain me?
112264
I'm looking at , which was closed as off-topic a few days ago. Just a few minutes ago, the OP radically revised it; it doesn't even resemble the original question anymore. In fact, the two versions only share about seven words and some punctuation. Here's a screenshot of the most recent revision:    So, the question for the community is this: Is this proper, or should it be rolled back?  Edit: I went ahead and rolled it back because it has a couple of answers already (responding to the old version). But I would still like to know the community consensus on this.
70719
When I came to post (about an unrelated SSL cert bug that turns out to be a duplicate), I saw a warning about a potential question ban on meta.SE.  I seem to have three questions on meta.SE, all with positive scores.  Why is this, and do I need to worry?  I am banned from asking questions on programmers.SE.
102572
In , I see 117 score for my top voted question. But if you visit the question, you'll find that it has 118 score. The last vote I got on that question was at least a week ago, IIRC. Bug?
20229
I recently flagged a question as "very low quality", just like I've flagged many questions in the past. However, my flag was found to be unhelpful this time. The same thing happened when I recently flagged a post as not an answer.  Are the moderators being more strict when it comes to handling quality related flags? If so, why?
3548
I’m still a long way from being able to cast close votes on SO (my rep is around 40% of the required amount).  When I see something that looks wrong I generally flag it (usually as not a real question, duplicate, or needs to be somewhere else).  I get the impression that my flag weight is relatively high (around 557).  Does this mean that I’m flagging too often or is it ok to flag whenever something seems like it’s in the wrong place?  Should I instead be ignoring the questions and assuming that close/delete votes will be cast by members with sufficient rep?  If I am doing the right thing, then what’s the appropriate action when I do eventually get to the point where I can cast close votes?  Do you just vote to close, or vote to close and flag, or is this a nonsense question that will make sense when I get there?
2176
I have six upvotes for the one question with no intervening history. They have been summarised into two groups - one with 4 events and one with 2 events. However, when you expand either, both show all 6 events. Minor I know, just letting you know.
35476
The  has the wording:     10 posts with score of 2 on meta.   Does this mean that to get the badge I need 10 posts with a score of exactly 2 at the same time?  Should the wording be changed to something like:     10 posts with score of 2 or more on meta.
102603
I have been going through some old posts, flagging them as necessary. But I have noticed that the number of posts that I am able to flag is continually staying at ten. It seems that the new flagging system has messed this up.  I am able to keep flagging posts even after 10, so I know it isn't a UI bug. This is a very big problem, because I can flag infinitely many times. And I am pretty sure this isn't the intended behavior of the overlords This isn't because I am being awarded more flags. I flag more than 13 posts in 5 minutes, and I can keep going without restriction  Some of the flags were accepted, so now my number is up to 13. But it is still staying at 13
14592
I saw a 1 character  and wondered why; apparently it was after my (less-comprehensive) answer was accepted, to allow the check-mark to be transferred to the higher voted answer (written by the asker) after giving himself a Populist badge.  I think that self-answers should be ineligible for the Populist badge.
72101
Few arguments against it:   Pressing the flag button doesn't mean actually submitting it (as in every test/form). There might be an unknown duplicate, if you assume it's the first post (as you were told) it might be worthy to flag it. You might want to look if someone else thought it was duplicate by "making half way" to flagging it.   Why pressing the flag button makes you fail an audit? I think it shouldn't.  Edit:  The implementation difficulty (fake flagging UI) and the tips about how avoid failing (and reviewing!) by skipping the answer adds some insight, but still doesn't answer the question why it's not a valid review.    Moreover, I would like to add one more,  describes a reviewer that failed an audit while trying to flag a question as off topic. The question was clearly off topic, and still after 1300 views no one flagged it.
110873
All my flags that were raised before April 2011 are marked as "active", except spam/offensive flags which are marked helpful:        Checking some, they were obviously helpful (e.g. post deleted as result) so most likely the "helpful" bit was not recorded yet back then.  I don't think it should stay "pending" forever, better just remove it and put "status not recorded" or something like that.  Worth also to mention, this is causing a mis-calculation in the new flag history, as reported here:
59310
I can't create a post with the .  There are errors for both the Japanese and Chinese characters.  Here is the post in question . It is peculiar that it supports 59 languages besides Japanese and Chinese.
107672
Somebody asked the following :    Clearly this is just a troll post so I (and other users) flagged it as spam. The spam flag was subsequently disputed (which I think simply means that a moderator rejected it):    Huh? Puzzled, I took another look at the list of possible flagging reasons:     I am flagging this question because         it is spam   This question is effectively an advertisement with no disclosure. It is not useful or relevant, but promotional.   it is offensive, abusive, or hate speech   This question contains content that a reasonable person would deem inappropriate for   respectful discourse.   it is a duplicate...   This question has been asked before and already has an answer.   it should be closed for another reason...   This question does not meet this site's standards and should be closed.   it is very low quality   This question has severe formatting or content problems. This question is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.   other (needs ♦ moderator attention)   This question needs a moderator's attention. Please describe exactly what's wrong.      Of these, only a few are applicable at all: “spam”, “should be closed for another reason”, “low quality” and “requires moderator attention”.  But:   it shouldn’t be closed (it has no value – it should be deleted), it’s not “low quality” (the description seems to fit actual, albeit bad, questions), and it doesn’t require moderator attention (I certainly didn’t want to bother a mod with this worthless post).   So I still think “spam” is the most fitting reason. Maybe it would help to have a more apt reason “troll post”, or maybe we could explicitly subsume this under one of the other points?