Timeline for Will/Should Serverfault be dropping the "networking support" in the upcoming future?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2013 at 1:04 | comment | added | Zypher Mod | @DavidBullock This is meta.sf, where just like on meta.so a down vote means exactly that - I don't agree with what you are saying. See: meta.serverfault.com/faq#vote-differences | |
| May 28, 2013 at 12:04 | comment | added | David Bullock | The number of downvotes is rather amusing, for what is a fair attempt at answering the question. It's as if on SF, a downvote means "I don't like what you had to say", whereas on SO, it is generally reserved for "this answer does not add any value to the question". I guess maybe in the end it'll probably wind up as a case of "on NE, at least I get some respect from my peers". | |
| May 26, 2013 at 12:31 | comment | added | the-wabbit | Protocol questions have historically been asked and answered on Server Fault, too. What the NE crowd is claiming are protocols which do not have that much expertise at Server Fault - which is pretty much everything in the area of carrier networking. It goes to show that NE is able to attract the experts in these areas at short notice, otherwise all the site is going to be is a network-topic fragment off Server Fault without real added value for anybody. | |
| May 26, 2013 at 5:53 | history | answered | David Bullock | CC BY-SA 3.0 |