So this question... The Coolest Server Names

It's horribly off topic. It's got a few votes to delete it right now because the community does not want it here (it's already been deleted once by the community).

I understand that it's being kept around for its historical significance, but it's not this site's history.

It's a question which came from SO, had many answers given by SO, and was migrated here. So can we send it back to SO? It's off topic there, yes, but it's also off topic here. At least at SO it would be back to its historical roots.

Or we could just delete it. That's happened once already, but Jeff brought it back. I don't want to start a "community vs. the mods (or SO leadership)" battle. At what point does "We don’t run Server Fault. The community does." begin or end?

The other option is we could just leave it. But it's not on topic. I don't fully understand why we would leave this off topic question here when we delete others that are similarly off topic.

share
5  
Consider this the question that decides the fate of the Coolest Server Names. thump thump –  sysadmin1138 Sep 4 '11 at 19:09
    
@sysadmin - I've edited the question to more clearly align with the goal of deciding ultimate fate. Hopefully we can end this question once and for all :-) –  Jason Berg Sep 4 '11 at 20:58
3  
Go vote for this MSO question to help alleviate the situation where hundreds of Delete votes are required for trash like this that gets migrated with tons of votes already on it. meta.stackexchange.com/questions/87031/… –  squillman Sep 6 '11 at 14:53
4  
Clearly this question is a nonsense. It's not "our" history. I don't care that some programmer once named their build servers after their favourite startrek TNG characters any more than I'd expect them to care about how "my" internal network's host naming structure applies to servers. –  RobM Sep 7 '11 at 10:57
    
Now that this is done. What about other questions like this? Example: serverfault.com/questions/7902/… and this serverfault.com/questions/3668/… –  Nixphoe Sep 9 '11 at 0:15
add comment

7 Answers 7

Throw this question into the sun.

share
    
The issue is that it requires something like 100+ community votes to delete and I'm not comfortable doing it on behalf of that many users. Although, most people won't notice it gone I'm guessing –  Mark Henderson Sep 5 '11 at 1:32
    
@Mark - According to meta.stackexchange.com/questions/50523/… we need 22 votes –  Jason Berg Sep 5 '11 at 1:49
    
This is why I'm trying for a vote. I want big numbers. And if the question deletes naturally, which would be the 2nd or 3rd time that's ever happened here I believe, then we won't need a mod-hammer. –  sysadmin1138 Sep 5 '11 at 2:44
    
@Jason: It just told me it needed another 320-odd delete votes. Farque. –  womble Sep 5 '11 at 3:46
    
@womble - I didn't notice. It said all rep for the question PLUS all rep for all of the answers divided by 20...so at this point, it's impossible for the community to get rid of it on its own no matter how much we may want to. –  Jason Berg Sep 5 '11 at 4:46
    
I was just told 221 votes still required. –  Iain Sep 6 '11 at 6:33
    
+1 I cast my delete vote on it ages ago. It got migrated from SO with a bazillion votes already on it. Because of this and the delete formula we're kinda screwed unless it gets mod-hammered. –  squillman Sep 6 '11 at 13:38
1  
Down to 220 votes needed... Considering there's 3,832 upvotes on the first page alone, and that would need 195 close votes to delete, plus the other pages.... We'll have to mod-hammer it eventually. But it would be nice to get a bunch of people in on it first. –  Chris S Sep 6 '11 at 18:24
    
@MarkHenderson: You might not notice it gone... but deleting this question actually broke StackStatus. –  Nathan Osman Sep 29 '11 at 6:01
    
@GeorgeEdison - how on earth...? –  Mark Henderson Sep 29 '11 at 9:16
    
@GeorgeEdison I'm guessing it was the monitor-page target. It goes away, so does the monitor. I've done much the same thing at my old job :} –  sysadmin1138 Sep 29 '11 at 11:57
add comment

Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye,

Three days have passed. Since then:

  • 30% of our >10K users have voted to delete that question, independent of the vote going on here.
  • 22 upvotes for sun-based disposal
  • 4 upvotes for 'send it back from whence it came'
  • Showers of hate upon 'Leave it'.

Based upon this, the question will be ritually tossed into the sun. Which is cranky today, so it is fitting.

It is gone.

Record of destruction

share
    
This makes a happy Berg –  Jason Berg Sep 8 '11 at 0:54
    
And there was much rejoicing. –  EEAA Sep 8 '11 at 1:25
2  
It is with genuine joy and pride that I see my name on that list. Thank you. This was a job far too long in the making. –  John Gardeniers Sep 8 '11 at 1:50
2  
As luck would have it, NASA caught the impact: ow.ly/i/gW93/original –  sysadmin1138 Sep 8 '11 at 14:30
    
Hark! I hear, TRUMPETS! –  squillman Sep 8 '11 at 21:38
add comment

If it were my choice, I'd just hit the delete button on it here and be done with it.

Yes, by today's rules it is off topic both here and on Stack Overflow. I don't feel it adds any useful information to this site, or any on the Stack Exchange network. It goes no way towards the Stack Exchange mission of "make the internet better" and as such should simply be obliterated.

I'd like to think we've all become much less tolerant of crap since December '10 when it was resurrected, and I'd hope everyone else would also agree. There has been a very visible onslaught against bad questions that don't add value to the internet, and to me this is one of them. Hey, it was practically Christmas - maybe Jeff had a few drinks and was feeling generous? :-)

share
2  
Don't migrate crap. Not Good Subjective. Delete it. –  jscott Sep 4 '11 at 20:42
    
Well, the community deleted it once. Jeff brought it back (I assume because of its historical significance). I'd hate to delete it again without his blessing. –  Jason Berg Sep 4 '11 at 20:49
2  
@Jason, Jeff is able to do whatever he likes with that or any other question. That should be no reason to refrain from honest voting. I'd personally rather be banned from the site than to wimp out. –  John Gardeniers Sep 5 '11 at 21:41
add comment

I've certainly done my bit to try and get rid of that question, as well as similar ones, but the system is against us. If Jeff brought it back from the dead I'd love to hear his reasoning for doing so. The only reasoning I can think of is that it brings traffic due to Google and traffic translates to revenue and revenue is the reason Stack Exchange exists.

That question is part of the history of SF only in the sense of being a great example of what NOT to post. Rather than adding value it merely detracts from SF and on at least one occasion I've seen it referenced as an excuse to post an off-topic question ("if they can do it why can't I?").

share
12  
The "it brings a LOT of traffic to the site" opinion holds little water with me, since it's exactly the kind of question you shouldn't ask here. The exemplar, even. The petulant in me says, "if the SO people want it kept, they can house it." –  sysadmin1138 Sep 4 '11 at 22:24
add comment

It needs to be burniated.

It adds nothing to the site. It was a "fun" question once upon a time maybe but we've moved on from that.

Perhaps it should be locked while its fate is being debated?

share
add comment

Send it back from whence it came.

share
add comment

Leave it, just keep it locked down.

share
1  
Is is possible to lock every bit of it, fixate it in history and prevent it from ever popping up on the front page again? –  Chris S Sep 6 '11 at 18:29
    
@ChrisS As I understand it Locking the post will do all of that. But it'll still hang out as one of the top-voted questions. –  sysadmin1138 Sep 6 '11 at 21:31
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .