This is the answer I'm taking about: <https://android.stackexchange.com/a/202062/205764>

The initial revision reads

> 
> Mim ajudem, com essa mensagem q esta aparecendo no meu lenovo z5the bootloader is unlocked and software integrity cannot be guaranteed. any data stored on the device may be available to attacker, do not store any sensitive data on device
> 
> 
> 

I recognized Portuguese and knew that it translated to

> 
> Please help me with this message that's appearing on my Lenovo Z5
> 
> 
> 

and flagged it as NAA after leaving a comment telling the author that they used a wrong language, as well as that the answer form was not for questions.

Izzy saw the answer and my comment, applied machine translation to the Portuguese part, got this result and declined my flag:

> 
> I help, with this message that is appearing in my Lenovo Z5
> 
> 
> 

My reason for the answer being an NAA is rather obvious: It said "please help me" with a common bootloader warning, while Izzy claimed that

> 
> poetic license. Put this way, it's a valid answer, isn't it? "How is this a security thread?" › "any data stored on the device may be available to attacker" :)
> 
> 
> 

Per my understanding, Izzy thought it was a valid answer because the BL warning contained information that could serve as an answer alone, and it could remain a valid answer with the wrong-language part translated (wrongly).

And now I disagree: While the BL message could provide some directive to an answer, it did appear in a wrong manner (coming as the error message after "please help me"). Therefore, it should not be considered as an answer, IMO. Think if the post came in English starting with "please help me" instead of an unrecognized language "mim ajudem", most people would have taken it correctly as an NAA.