Skip to main content
Server Fault

Return to Answer

replaced http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/ with https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/
Source Link
Community Bot
Community Bot
  • 1

It's possible that the question's validity could be interpreted a bit more generously on http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/ - though that's just me spitballing.

Sorting through the pricing & marketing hassles of vendors is definitely an annoying part of the job, but has been filed into the 'off topic' category for SF.

I feel for you in that it's equally frustrating to take the time to read the FAQ and put together a question that seems to meet the criteria for a valid question - only to have it closed. We naturally feel a bit protective of our questions (I'm no exception!), and things can get prickly in a hurry when the criticism starts.

If it's any consolation, the FAQ has been debated endlessly in an attempt to balance thoroughness vs. length. If it's too long, more people skip it, but then sometimes people are caught defending a question asked in good faith.

For what it's worth, we could've been more gracious about the close. We should definitely make an effort to leave comments for closing questions that are valid from what you could tell by reading the FAQ.

It's possible that the question's validity could be interpreted a bit more generously on http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/ - though that's just me spitballing.

Sorting through the pricing & marketing hassles of vendors is definitely an annoying part of the job, but has been filed into the 'off topic' category for SF.

I feel for you in that it's equally frustrating to take the time to read the FAQ and put together a question that seems to meet the criteria for a valid question - only to have it closed. We naturally feel a bit protective of our questions (I'm no exception!), and things can get prickly in a hurry when the criticism starts.

If it's any consolation, the FAQ has been debated endlessly in an attempt to balance thoroughness vs. length. If it's too long, more people skip it, but then sometimes people are caught defending a question asked in good faith.

For what it's worth, we could've been more gracious about the close. We should definitely make an effort to leave comments for closing questions that are valid from what you could tell by reading the FAQ.

It's possible that the question's validity could be interpreted a bit more generously on https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/ - though that's just me spitballing.

Sorting through the pricing & marketing hassles of vendors is definitely an annoying part of the job, but has been filed into the 'off topic' category for SF.

I feel for you in that it's equally frustrating to take the time to read the FAQ and put together a question that seems to meet the criteria for a valid question - only to have it closed. We naturally feel a bit protective of our questions (I'm no exception!), and things can get prickly in a hurry when the criticism starts.

If it's any consolation, the FAQ has been debated endlessly in an attempt to balance thoroughness vs. length. If it's too long, more people skip it, but then sometimes people are caught defending a question asked in good faith.

For what it's worth, we could've been more gracious about the close. We should definitely make an effort to leave comments for closing questions that are valid from what you could tell by reading the FAQ.

Source Link
Kara Marfia Mod
Kara Marfia Mod
  • 7.9k
  • 16
  • 12

It's possible that the question's validity could be interpreted a bit more generously on http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/ - though that's just me spitballing.

Sorting through the pricing & marketing hassles of vendors is definitely an annoying part of the job, but has been filed into the 'off topic' category for SF.

I feel for you in that it's equally frustrating to take the time to read the FAQ and put together a question that seems to meet the criteria for a valid question - only to have it closed. We naturally feel a bit protective of our questions (I'm no exception!), and things can get prickly in a hurry when the criticism starts.

If it's any consolation, the FAQ has been debated endlessly in an attempt to balance thoroughness vs. length. If it's too long, more people skip it, but then sometimes people are caught defending a question asked in good faith.

For what it's worth, we could've been more gracious about the close. We should definitely make an effort to leave comments for closing questions that are valid from what you could tell by reading the FAQ.