Timeline for ServerFault Fundamentalism
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2013 at 8:42 | comment | added | James | OK John, I've re-worded it. But the fact is that the solution requires a particular tool...! Or I'll get something like "you need the Windows equiv of tcptraceroute for Linux"... This censorship just doesn't seem helpful - it's removing an intrinsic element of the question and helps explain to people what I'm trying to achieve (which others can then reuse in the future). | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 8:29 | comment | added | James | Apologies Iain - semantics - I didn't mean moderators per se. RobM - and so do you see my point? You cannot simply ban all questions inherently requiring the mention of tools which you need to achieve a solution! Say someone using Linux wants to find out how to add resilience to their storage iscsi mount using multipathing but doesn't know how to do it - is this banned? Because the answer requires mention of something like multipathd... I can see the need to protect against hugely general questions like "what's the best Linux distro" but this is different. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 8:29 | comment | added | John Gardeniers | You asked for a tool to do a job. That's a shopping question. Had you described a problem and asked for solutions your question would still be open. The difference is is very significant and makes the question either on or off topic. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 8:21 | comment | added | Rob Moir | I wasn't involved in closing the question, but it is a shopping question. And closing questions like that for the various reasons discussed in here over the years has been part of "the real purpose of this site" for a very long time. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 7:02 | comment | added | user9517 Mod | No moderators were involved in the closing of your question - it was members of the community. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 3:49 | history | answered | James | CC BY-SA 3.0 |