Timeline for Serverfault mods on a higher horse than stackoverflow (closing questions)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sep 5, 2014 at 13:32 | comment | added | IceCold | You mean like Bill the Lizard. He deletes questions all day long: sergworks.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/why-stackoverflow-sucks/… . I hope he won't delete this comment :) | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 20:14 | history | edited | MadHatter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 516 characters in body
|
Dec 5, 2013 at 19:03 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | As an actual moderator, I never saw the question being discussed before it was closed. My first reaction would have been to kick it over to Unix & Linux where open-ended questions about kernel internals and Unix history are more welcome. Server Fault is about making things work and solving concrete problems. Also, very closely related: How can I ask better questions on Server Fault? | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 18:30 | vote | accept | MetaChrome | ||
Dec 5, 2013 at 18:10 | answer | added | Ward - Trying CodidactMod | timeline score: 2 | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 17:43 | history | edited | Rob Moir | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
Dec 5, 2013 at 17:32 | answer | added | voretaq7Mod | timeline score: 16 | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 17:31 | review | Close votes | |||
Dec 16, 2013 at 20:38 | |||||
Dec 5, 2013 at 17:22 | answer | added | voretaq7Mod | timeline score: 8 | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 17:10 | comment | added | MetaChrome | I think this question ought to be deleted because it doesn't really offer a proposal to maintain a certain meta and the specified elements are context specific. In addition, it's title is an incorrect portrayal of moderators once you understand the explicit goals of the site. Discussions of the explicit goals of the site are best left to the already opened discussions. Eg, maybe the explicit ought to be changed (which I don't really have any input on, because I could see the usefulness of maintaining explicit order) but that isn't relevent to the context of this question. | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:56 | vote | accept | MetaChrome | ||
Dec 5, 2013 at 18:30 | |||||
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:44 | history | edited | MadHatter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 characters in body
|
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:44 | answer | added | MadHatter | timeline score: 8 | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:24 | comment | added | MetaChrome | In the sense that, if a question is coming from a position of examining alternatives from a logical standpoint of a sys admin or if it's just another, plop down a question of the top of your head. I think serverfault's explicit meta is actually VERY valuable. | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:17 | comment | added | MetaChrome | I'm actually fine. I didn't realize the explicit meta of this site with regards to professional sys admins and I understand the difficulty of enforcing said meta. I think that it is a fine meta, but it sometimes difficult to ascertain if a does in fact provide enough context or not. Sometimes they do sometimes they don't. In general, I think I'll try to keep more general (l)unix questions to unix.stackexchange | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:14 | history | rollback | voretaq7Mod |
Rollback to Revision 1
|
|
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:14 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | @MetaChrome Normally I don't undelete mSO questions when the OP deletes them (I consider them "withdrawn" and thus resolved), but I think yours actually warrants an answer - we really don't want you to go away unhappy! If after I've posted my answer you still want to delete this discussion I'll respect that choice. | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 16:12 | history | undeleted | voretaq7Mod | ||
Dec 5, 2013 at 9:27 | history | deleted | MetaChrome | via Vote | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 9:26 | comment | added | faker | None of your questions were actually closed by mods. The community voted on them, that is kind of a big difference. | |
Dec 5, 2013 at 9:23 | history | edited | MetaChrome | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 160 characters in body; edited title
|
Dec 5, 2013 at 9:12 | history | asked | MetaChrome | CC BY-SA 3.0 |