<p>I cannot explain why the concerned mod declined the flags. Instead, let me add my two cents:</p>
<p>Suppose I write an answer:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Let <span class="math-container">$\rm f$</span> be a Baire function such that for every <span class="math-container">$\rm x, $</span> the equation <span class="math-container">$\rm f(x, y) =0\tag 1\label 1$</span> has a unique solution. Then <span class="math-container">$\rm y$</span> as a function of <span class="math-container">$\rm x$</span> defined by the above function <span class="math-container">$\eqref 1$</span> is Baire. ...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now someone reads the post and leaves the comment:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I agree with the post but am quite baffled at your usage of <code>\rm</code> in typesetting the mathematical expressions; also there is only one relation and you already stated it as <em>the above function</em>, so was it necessary to add a reference to the equation since it is apparent that it has not been referred later in the post? A passing observation only. Otherwise <span class="math-container">$+1.$</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Does it add anything directly to the content of the post?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>However, is it irrelevant and is a possible opener of a chat akin to meeting a colleague/classmate after a long time at the bar?</p>
<p>Again no.</p>
<p>Typesetting and formatting play a critical role in any post and should be taken seriously along the same par with that of the content in the post: be it numbering, be it the font style, be it highlighting, be it indentation, et cetera. If someone feels this needs to be addressed, they definitely should leave a comment.</p>
<hr />
<p>This is what happened exactly here. gung - Reinstate Monica sought a <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/66192/how-to-fit-a-discrete-distribution-to-count-data/66197#comment127799_66197">clarification</a> on Glen_b's usage of indenting to which Glen_b clarified their stance, which changed after few years prompting them to leave a comment airing the same.</p>
<p><span class="math-container">$\bullet$</span> Are these comments obsolete/outdated comments?</p>
<p>I don't think so. Albeit being not directly related to the content of the post, it does point to the changes made in the post. One can opine that the changes were minimal. But that is subjective. At least to me, I take typesetting and formatting very seriously.</p>
<p><span class="math-container">$\bullet$</span> Are those chatty comments?</p>
<p>No again. Yes, there is a bit of friendly tone between them as they are two of the old users of the community here. &quot;... have nothing whatsoever to do with the post! Whether tangential discussions or simply two friends chewing the fat, these are pretty benign&quot; - this doesn't apply here as the comments are again, while not directly related to the post's content, is not altogether irrelevant to the post. And this thread isn't even long enough for it to be taken to a chat room or outright deleted.</p>
<p>Now I would have no consternation either if the mod decided to delete them. But I won't agree to this: they <strong>must</strong> be deleted on the grounds stated.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I had to scroll down (and down, and down...) in my phone to see if there were any other answers, which was frustrating.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I also happen to use my phone most of the time to access the site. You can always check how many answers there are to the question: it is explicitly stated at the beginning of the answer field:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/bLXRtm.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/bLXRtm.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>If you aren't interested in the first answer, you can quickly scroll down.</p>
<hr />
<p>Edit:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I'll try to restrain myself ;-)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I am not able to comprehend what gung tried to mean by that, that is if there was any inner meaning to it (only they can explain!). Was it a joke? Maybe. Maybe not. They were reacting to the clarification made by Glen_b.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>given that, with the last comment (and edit), all the ones above it are now literally obsolete (what they refer to is not there anymore), should one now raise a custom flag on it, suggesting to delete all of them?
...
I was already at the end of it, I was just trying to see what more there is, but I found myself drowned in irrelevant clutter...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Surely! Go ahead and raise a flag if you deem it is necessary.</p>
<p>But let me add a brief remark here: raise a flag if it is <strong>direly</strong> needed. If you dig in, you can easily find many comments which seem to be not that important or trivial compared to the main discussion. Would you resort to raise a flag continuously? I adopt the practice only if it is absolutely necessary.</p>
<p>If the moderator decided to delete those comments, I would have no problem either. But if I were in the mod's position, I would have declined the flag due to the points I already stated above but for emphasis, I feel those stated reasons don't add to them. To that particular comment by gung, it seems to be border line. And finally reversal of the stance by Glen_b does indeed make their earlier comment not necessary but does this warrant raising a flag for them to be deleted? I am not sure but go ahead. I personally would have deleted my earlier comments if I changed my stance and stating it later.</p>
<p>Lastly I would like to allure your attention to this from the Meta post you linked:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Note: don't be too concerned if the occasional comment flag is declined; comment value is often subjective and moderators are encouraged to process flags quickly - in most cases, it's no big deal if comments persist a bit longer than needed. Declined comment flags do not count toward flag bans.</p>
</blockquote>
