We need good quality questions but who cares if there are noobish questions too, that is what search is for.

That rather depends on what you define as "noobish" doesn't it. Questions should reflect a professional standard. That doesn't mean they can't be questions at a more elementary level, but that the questions themselves should attain a certain standard quality in how well they are asked.

That has nothing to do with whether or not the question is a basic one or the person asking it is new to the profession, or just dipping their toes in the profession.

No one is obliged to answer anything they don't want to.

I'm not sure where that came from. At no point did anyone suggest anyone was obliged, did they?

It doesn't matter if there is collateral help for others in the process of working in the interests of the sysadmin. The current focus on trying to expel these other people at all costs harms the usefulness of the site to those like me, the target professional sysadmin!

There are certain questions and people who keep asking those very poor questions, whose removal from the site is not going to hurt you, the target professional sysadmin.

Clearly you and I are not going to agree with one another as to where that line is drawn, but to the best of my knowledge the fundamental mission of this site since the day it was founded has been to cater to professional systems administration tasks and scenarios. If people are unable to ask questions of that standard, despite being helped, then the site is not helped by their presence. In fact several good contributors have been driven off by having to wade through too many poor questions.

If you want to maintain that people asking questions being driven off harms the site then I think I'm entitled to point out that people who answer questions being driven off the site also harms the site, so where do you suggest we balance those two requirements?

On top of this, I suspect that the people who keep asking those very low level questions are not being helped much either; we've seen situations where someone has struggled to ask a question, received help to lick it into an answerable shape and then has been totally unable to comprehend the correct answers they've received and has either given up or has pretty much demanded someone more or less do the work for them. And that's never been what this site is about.

We need good quality questions but who cares if there are noobish questions too, that is what search is for.

That rather depends on what you define as "noobish" doesn't it. Questions should reflect a professional standard. That doesn't mean they can't be questions at a more elementary level, but that the questions themselves should attain a certain standard quality in how well they are asked.

That has nothing to do with whether or not the question is a basic one or the person asking it is new to the profession, or even just dipping their toes in the profession.

No one is obliged to answer anything they don't want to.

I'm not sure where that came from. At no point did anyone suggest anyone was obliged, did they?

It doesn't matter if there is collateral help for others in the process of working in the interests of the sysadmin. The current focus on trying to expel these other people at all costs harms the usefulness of the site to those like me, the target professional sysadmin!

There are certain questions and people who keep asking those very poor questions, whose removal from the site is not going to hurt you, the target professional sysadmin. Your continuing professional development is not being hurt because you didn't read the question about "LOL! WHY CAN'T ANYONE IN MY OFFICE INTERNET, LOL" and yes there really are questions like that being asked.

Clearly you and I are not going to agree with one another as to where the line is drawn on what is and is not an acceptable question, but to the best of my knowledge the fundamental mission of this site since the day it was founded has been to cater to professional systems administration tasks and scenarios. If people are unable to ask questions of that standard, despite being helped, then the site is not helped by their presence. In fact several good contributors have been driven off by having to wade through too many poor questions.

If you want to maintain that people asking questions being driven off harms the site then I think I'm entitled to point out that people who answer questions being driven off the site also harms the site, so where do you suggest we balance those two requirements?

On top of this, I suspect that the people who keep asking those very low level questions are not being helped much either; we've seen situations where someone has struggled to ask a question, received help to lick it into an answerable shape and then has been totally unable to comprehend the correct answers they've received and has either given up or has pretty much demanded someone more or less do the work for them. And that's never been what this site is about.