Skip to main content
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
Source Link

Based on some of the comments here I went and looked at the FAQ again. We've always, as far as I can remember, closed policy subversion questions as Off Topic.

The question that brought this up is this onethis one and it apparently got people interested in it because it's about trying to gain access to servers from within Iran, which by all accounts is a Bad Government which does Bad Things. I don't know, I don't live there, and it's not really topical to the discussion, in my opinion.

However, there was enough interest in it that I went and asked the folks over at Security.SX whether it was a better fit there. I was led to believe it was and so flagged for migration. Whether it's a better fit there may or may not be topical to this discussion, and may need a meta over on Security's side to hash that out.

TL;DR

We've always closed policy subversion as Off Topic, we should explicitly state so in the FAQ.

Based on some of the comments here I went and looked at the FAQ again. We've always, as far as I can remember, closed policy subversion questions as Off Topic.

The question that brought this up is this one and it apparently got people interested in it because it's about trying to gain access to servers from within Iran, which by all accounts is a Bad Government which does Bad Things. I don't know, I don't live there, and it's not really topical to the discussion, in my opinion.

However, there was enough interest in it that I went and asked the folks over at Security.SX whether it was a better fit there. I was led to believe it was and so flagged for migration. Whether it's a better fit there may or may not be topical to this discussion, and may need a meta over on Security's side to hash that out.

TL;DR

We've always closed policy subversion as Off Topic, we should explicitly state so in the FAQ.

Based on some of the comments here I went and looked at the FAQ again. We've always, as far as I can remember, closed policy subversion questions as Off Topic.

The question that brought this up is this one and it apparently got people interested in it because it's about trying to gain access to servers from within Iran, which by all accounts is a Bad Government which does Bad Things. I don't know, I don't live there, and it's not really topical to the discussion, in my opinion.

However, there was enough interest in it that I went and asked the folks over at Security.SX whether it was a better fit there. I was led to believe it was and so flagged for migration. Whether it's a better fit there may or may not be topical to this discussion, and may need a meta over on Security's side to hash that out.

TL;DR

We've always closed policy subversion as Off Topic, we should explicitly state so in the FAQ.

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/ServerFault/status/154886036999258112
Source Link
Holocryptic
  • 5.7k
  • 16
  • 17

Should we modify the FAQ to include policy subversion as explicitly Off Topic?

Based on some of the comments here I went and looked at the FAQ again. We've always, as far as I can remember, closed policy subversion questions as Off Topic.

The question that brought this up is this one and it apparently got people interested in it because it's about trying to gain access to servers from within Iran, which by all accounts is a Bad Government which does Bad Things. I don't know, I don't live there, and it's not really topical to the discussion, in my opinion.

However, there was enough interest in it that I went and asked the folks over at Security.SX whether it was a better fit there. I was led to believe it was and so flagged for migration. Whether it's a better fit there may or may not be topical to this discussion, and may need a meta over on Security's side to hash that out.

TL;DR

We've always closed policy subversion as Off Topic, we should explicitly state so in the FAQ.