There is a significant number of answers flagged «not an answer» and/or «very low quality».
What exactly do flaggers expect from those flags?
I have deleted some answers which were flagged in that way when they were barely comprehensible or not actually related to the question—extreme situations, let us say— but I will not start deleting posts (much less editing/"fixing" them...) because others think they are of very low quality. Deleting posts because I think they are of low quality would sort of make sense, but deleting posts because someone else does seems a peculiarly odd thing to do!
I don't think moderators to be editors or referees of the site.
In many cases, the way I handled the flags was by adding a comment suggesting the poster of the flagged item either expand his ideas, be more verbose, &c. But that is something that the flagger himself could have done and, in fact, would be best done by the flagger!
Maybe we can agree on a policy of some sort, at least among regular users, on this point.
One option is the following: let downvoting be the way to express what in lots of cases is being channeled right now through «very low quality»-flags, ideally accompanied with an explanatory comment explaining to the author of the problematic question/answer what the problem is, and sometimes suggesting that the downvote could be cleared if the post did get fixed, or something.