Timeline for How do I leave SF and have all of my questions and comments permanently deleted?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 30, 2012 at 23:25 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 7, 2013 at 3:01 | |||||
| S Dec 30, 2012 at 23:05 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| S Dec 30, 2012 at 23:05 | history | unlocked | CommunityBot | ||
| S Dec 29, 2012 at 22:25 | history | notice added | user9517Mod | Comments only | |
| S Dec 29, 2012 at 22:25 | history | locked | user9517Mod | ||
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:23 | comment | added | user9517 Mod | @martin's: As I said earlier SO's faq explicitly includes developer tools, *AMP questions are developer tools, *AMP is on topic for SO. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:23 | comment | added | martin's | @EEAA With regards to deleting my answer. SF can't both not like my question and then derive benefit from the work that went into finding an answer. That would not be right. Perhaps this should be a rule across SE: If a question is closed all answers and comments are removed. That would add some weight to closing questions and would be fair on other fronts as well. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:21 | comment | added | Chopper3 | Troll alert everyone | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:20 | comment | added | martin's | @eeaa Sorry, I thought I did. This is a matter of semantics. Take my question and remove XAMPP as the context. What do you have left: Running Apache on an machine serving a bunch of sites via virtual hosts. The question was squarely about setting up Apache and the machines in the internal network. It had to do with httpd.conf and host and how to deal with this within a closed network without an internal DNS server. We can focus all you want on the packaged one-click install but that does not negate that the core of my question was about Apache and networking in a pro environment. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:06 | comment | added | EEAA | @martin's - I'm not sure why you keep ignoring my points about XAMPP being off-topic to to it being a developer tool. I've mentioned it several times and you haven't responded to this point, so I'm starting to think you're just avoiding it. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:03 | comment | added | EEAA | @martin's - please see this direct quote from the XAMPP site: (emphasis mine) "The philosophy behind XAMPP is to build an easy to install distribution for developers to get into the world of Apache. To make it convenient for developers XAMPP is configured with all features turned on." We appreciate your helpful Q&A, and to be honest, it's a shame that you deleted your answer. That said, there is a ton of "helpful" information out there that, in spite of its helpfulness, is still off-topic. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 22:00 | comment | added | martin's | @EEAA It is obvious we will not agree on this particular point. I see nothing that indicates that *AMPP does not fall under SF other than what I am choosing to call elitist selection. It's funny, it seems that *AMPP questions have no place in the SE communities. SO an SU FAQ's exclude them and SF folks don't want them. Funny. The reaonsit bothers me so much is that in trying to solve my problem I came across lots of people with similar issues and bad answers. I posted a good answer, one that took probably twenty of effort and the result is a closed answer. I don't understand it. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 21:58 | comment | added | EEAA | Except as delivered in XAMPP, it's a developer's tool. XAMPP is not meant to be used in any capacity other than that. Therein lies the misunderstanding. It is not difficult to deploy a simple, updatable, secure LAMP stack. Steps for doing so are well-documented elsewhere. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 21:57 | comment | added | martin's | @EEAA The part that I neglected to mention is that, in my case at least, I spent several additional hours working on the problem. I didn't wait for a magical SF answer. When I did fix the problem I came back to SF and posted the solution. One that, based on my research, would benefit many. Shortly after that the question was closed. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 21:55 | comment | added | martin's | @EEAA Scenario: You are working your tail off to resolve a server problem. Yes, Apache, last time I looked, is server software. You have two dozen workstations that need to connect to this service. You dig far and deep. Ten hours later you decide that a little outside help might be in order. Sometimes the answer is right there in front of you but you just can't see it. Some of us just have too muchon our plates. You post a legitimate server and networking question on SF. It's closed even though it fits the FAQ. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 21:10 | vote | accept | martin's | ||
| Dec 29, 2012 at 20:59 | comment | added | EEAA | Also, I should note that your posts won't be deleted if you delete your account. They'll just become somewhat anonymous. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 20:57 | comment | added | EEAA | Please, take a deep breath and wait a second before throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Nothing was done that was in violation of anything in the FAQ. You did the right thing in bringing your concerns to meta.SF. You may not agree with the way things are done here, but by participating in the discussion, you can perhaps help us understand your use case, as well as coming to understand why questions about XAMPP tend to get closed. | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 20:54 | answer | added | user9517Mod | timeline score: 9 | |
| Dec 29, 2012 at 20:49 | history | asked | martin's | CC BY-SA 3.0 |