I flagged this answer as "not an answer" the full text of which says:
This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the question. It should possibly be an edit, a comment, another question, or deleted altogether.
Emphasis mine, relating to all reasons I thought the flag would apply.
My flag was declined with a reason of "flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer". I don't follow this at all (and grant that it may be a 'canned' response selected from choices). The answer asks a clarifying question (should be a comment) and suggests 'using' an interface tolerance setting which has absolutely nothing to do with the question asked. It's not just wrong (in which case I would have downvoted it, not flagged, and have done so in the past), it's completely irrelevant. Should I have chosen "it is very low quality" instead?
This answer has severe formatting or content problems. This answer is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.
Or should, as the declination indicates, it not have been flagged at all and just downvoted? I note this question is highly related to Why was Very Low Quality flag declined?
I want to make it clear I'm not asking this as an argument with whoever declined the flag, or over this specific instance. I'm genuinely trying to understand the flagging system and how it's being interpreted here - which may not be possible since there are multiple interpreters. I note on the help page some guides to using the flags. The one for 'not an answer' seems to indicate very specific cases of 'not an answer' - those where whatever the content is, it should have been posted somewhere else (as the rest of the explanation says) but that it has nothing to do with the quality of the content. In this case I find the phrase "does not attempt to answer the question" a little too broad.