It isn't, not according to the published rules of the site, How do I use the power of consideration responsibly?

That link says: "To reap a highly offensive posting."; so it comes down to how you define "highly offensive".

I personally find that monk's persistent habit of picking a "well known algorithm" (for anything) at random, and then posting a reply that makes it sound to the uninitiated (and apparently even a surprising number of those you'd think were initiates), like it has some definitive role to play in the solution to the problem; far more offensive than the occasional bad words; minor typographical and grammatical errors; forgetting to mention (or being unaware that we are "meant to") that we've asked the same question elsewhere also; and a whole bunch of other stuff people routinely get consideration happy about.

To my thinking, the biggest sin a technical forum can make is to allow grossly inaccurate replies to technical questions to stand unchallenged and unlabeled. They pollute, corrupt and call into question, the wealth of good technical information that is found here.

We are not talking about the occasional mistake or misunderstanding here; but ongoing, deliberate, knowing, consistently completely irrelevant, technically bankrupt replies wrapped over in just enough fluff to make them pass cursory inspection; posted for no other reason than to try and exploit the effectively random nature of the voting system; and to annoy. Thousands of them going back years.

There should be a solution.

My OP above wasn't a serious request for such powers -- I've consistently demonstrated that I don't want any special powers here; or anywhere -- but rather an act of frustration, with an underlying hope that some discussion might ensue, that might lead to a permanent solution to problem.