Timeline for VirtualBox question
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 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/
|
|
| Nov 14, 2013 at 15:46 | comment | added | Kyle | @RobM I was requested to post this meta thread to debate whether the question belonged or not. Now you're complaining that I am debating the point. I'm willing to concede the fact that the question won't be reopened, and possibly that it shouldn't be. It looks like you're just here to complain about VirtualBox not being an enterprise product, which is a point we already covered and came to a consensus on. | |
| Nov 14, 2013 at 15:40 | comment | added | Rob Moir | The point, @KyleM, is that a product is not on topic here purely because someone at the vendor's website team vomited the word "enterprise" onto the product description page. I'm glad your problem is solved but just remember that you're the person who was prepared to spend more time trying to gerrymander your question rather than actually improve it so that it might have been on topic here or made it a good candidate to move to another place it would have got answered with no fuss. Before worrying about the splinter in our eyes you might want to remove the log in your own. | |
| Nov 14, 2013 at 15:32 | comment | added | Kyle | @RobM It's already been established in this thread that questions about VirtualBox are SOMETIMES allowed. Not only is your analogy bad, but your point is lost. And finally, I've given up on convincing the moderators here. Unfortunately just like every other forum and venue, there is a tendency to agree with your peers regardless of the argument. Hence the arbitrary downvotes on this meta thread. So I wasn't really expecting to convince anyone. Nor do I care, my problem is already solved. | |
| Nov 14, 2013 at 11:04 | comment | added | Rob Moir | It's an enterprise virtualization product according to Oracle. If rockstar suddenly redefine Max Payne 3 as a "enterprise workstation stress-testing product" or if Microsoft say they developed their networkable version of Hearts as a network diagnostic tool then would we have to support questions about those particular games here? No. | |
| Nov 13, 2013 at 4:20 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @AndrewB I dunno. I don't feel entirely 100% about any of the answers on that question, which is why I haven't accepted any of them, and I don't feel that this particular question is even close to a duplicate. Yet. | |
| Nov 13, 2013 at 4:17 | history | edited | Michael HamptonMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Nov 13, 2013 at 0:25 | comment | added | Andrew B | While I see where voretaq7 is coming from RE: this being about a specific question, this still feels like a retread of In what circumstances should VirtualBox questions be on topic? | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 23:22 | comment | added | Ward - Trying Codidact Mod | Anyone with 3000+ rep on the main site can check the close vote review queue here and vote to leave it open if they think closing it is wrong. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 23:19 | answer | added | Ward - Trying CodidactMod | timeline score: 5 | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 23:08 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | @Bryan I agree. This question is NOT a duplicate of Virtualbox is losing the benefit of the doubt. This discussion is about the topicality of a specific question (whether or not it is in scope). The suggested duplicate provides some guidance on determining which side of the line it falls on, but does not address this specific instance. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 22:39 | comment | added | user11604 | Ironically, despite the OP being sent here to discuss the subject (Kudos to the OP for doing so), I'm amazed^h^h^h^h^h^h disappointed that this question has two close votes against it. What exactly is wrong with this meta question that warrants close votes? | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 20:08 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod |
Re: 'meta' thread don't constitute enforceable site rules, I'm afraid precedent is against you here. Counterexample: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8231/… is used as justification for removing "link only" answers. Another: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13676/… is the standard justification for the "Questions & Answers must be in English" policy on the trilogy sites. There are SF-specific policy posts as well.
|
|
| Nov 12, 2013 at 20:05 | answer | added | voretaq7Mod | timeline score: 5 | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:42 | history | edited | Chris SMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Try not to be inflamatory
|
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:42 | comment | added | Chris S Mod | I have to agree with Matt. But, Server Fault is also about managing workstations (note: that's multiple, generally many). I could see a dev shop where you need to distribute VirtualBox VMs. The question seems vaguely relevant, though VirtualBox has import/export functions that make the process fairly trivial. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:40 | history | edited | voretaq7Mod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Inline comments as they've been cleaned up from the original thread (OT)
|
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:39 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | Now that you have posted this meta discussion (the correct way to handle disputes about moderation and site policy) I have unlocked your question on the main site to allow editing and removed the comment thread. I've inserted them as a photo in the question for posterity. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:21 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 13, 2013 at 0:27 | |||||
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:19 | comment | added | Matt Bear | There's two issues here, VirtualBox isn't enterprise grade and by that I mean, if your using VirtualBox in a production environment you are doing it wrong, it doesn't matter what Oracle calls it, it's a handy dev/testing tool and that's it. The fact that your arguing that it is enterprise grade shows a huge lack of knowledge/experience. Second Windows 7 isn't a server. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:07 | comment | added | tombull89 |
enterprise virtualization product according to Oracle...is it?! Hyper-V, VMWare ESXi, Xen, sure. But VirtualBox as enterprise virtulisation? No. Nononono.
|
|
| Nov 12, 2013 at 19:05 | comment | added | Shane Madden | See also: Virtualbox is losing the benefit of the doubt | |
| Nov 12, 2013 at 18:51 | history | asked | Kyle | CC BY-SA 3.0 |