Timeline for The Server Fault Wiki of recommended practices
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:14 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
|
|
| Jul 6, 2012 at 14:52 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by voretaq7Mod | ||
| Jul 6, 2012 at 14:52 | history | migrated | from serverfault.com (revisions) | ||
| Sep 9, 2010 at 12:46 | comment | added | gWaldo | Funny what you stumble on in the older articles... | |
| Sep 3, 2009 at 0:44 | comment | added | Avery Payne | (sigh) wow...and so it begins. Voting to close this. | |
| Jun 27, 2009 at 18:34 | comment | added | Avery Payne | Lesson learned: if you start a pure-play community wiki, no-one will come. If you start it, upvote people, then convert it, people will rain suggestions on you from everywhere. This is a big problem in my eyes, and I'm starting to think that the "wiki" concept needs a lot of rework. | |
| Jun 27, 2009 at 18:32 | vote | accept | Avery Payne | ||
| Jun 26, 2009 at 21:31 | comment | added | Avery Payne | Whelp, it looks like another quandry: I can either punish myself by deleting or closing the question and loose the bounty I put into this, or I can answer the question myself to salvage the failed bounty attempt, but I don't like do thing that. So, what should happen? Seems like no-one is going to do anything, and I don't see why it should be fair that I'm punished for trying to do something "nice" for the community. | |
| Jun 20, 2009 at 19:43 | answer | added | Kamil Kisiel | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 20, 2009 at 19:20 | comment | added | Avery Payne | Jeff, we have a quandry here. There have been no postings, but I suddenly find that at least 7 people are interested in this question and 8 more have marked it as "favorite". Guess it's time to haul out a bounty? (hauls out a 50-point chunk of flesh) ouch! That stings. Well, let's see what happens. | |
| Jun 19, 2009 at 16:30 | comment | added | Avery Payne | Looks like we're going to close this, unless there's some action in the next 12 hours. Anyone care to post? | |
| Jun 15, 2009 at 17:20 | comment | added | Avery Payne | Very well. Tags are nice, but I find they are a lot more effort to sift through than to have a one-stop-shop page that has all of the relevant links on it. The second goal was to do a little mental exercise, if all of the recommendations from SF were used to run a conceptualized group of servers for some purpose, what would that look like? But if everyone's for tags, I won't buck the trend, so I'll close the question. How's this: if I don't get another bite in a week's time, I'll close it, fair enough? | |
| Jun 15, 2009 at 7:10 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | I agree with David. Let's have some best-practices tags too. | |
| Jun 14, 2009 at 9:25 | comment | added | Avery Payne | Then I have to open each and every one to find "the answer". Tagging is great from a "self-organizing" perspective, but it's the lazy way out, IMHO. | |
| Jun 14, 2009 at 8:45 | comment | added | David Schmitt | A better way would be to just tag those questions "best-practices". That way you can just refer to the tag search: serverfault.com/questions/tagged/best-practices and be done with it. Much less clutter and work for all. | |
| Jun 14, 2009 at 5:52 | answer | added | Joe | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 14, 2009 at 5:50 | answer | added | Avery Payne | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 14, 2009 at 5:44 | history | asked | Avery Payne | CC BY-SA 2.5 |