Timeline for Serverfault mods on a higher horse than stackoverflow (closing questions)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2015 at 16:20 | comment | added | Pacerier | @voretaq7, Hmm, on the other hand, there's alot of people with skillset in both areas. | |
| May 26, 2015 at 21:17 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | @Pacerier "Writing crashy code or insecure code is a no-no" is s a very idealistic and oversimplified view of the world. If it were remotely true there would be no security holes and the Blue Screen of Death wouldn't exist. Developers are human. Humans make mistakes, take short-cuts, and generally screw up whenever the opportunity presents itself. Having different humans (sysadmins) acting as a counterbalance is an imperfect solution, but a vast improvement on one person trying to wear two hats. | |
| May 24, 2015 at 13:38 | comment | added | Pacerier | @voretaq7, However, in the first place, the programmer should be responsible that their code don't create security or stability problems when interfaced with other code. Writing crashy code or insecure code is a no-no. | |
| May 20, 2015 at 21:09 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | @Pacerier No. To be frank you cannot be both: They are two fundamentally different modes of operation. Developers create new and awesome features. Sysadmins keep those features functional in a production environment, integrating them with all the other new and awesome features from all the other developers and ensuring their interactions don't create security or stability problems. Developers and sysadmins should be interacting regularly, but they are distinctly different practice areas, which is why they are separate sites in the Stack Exchange network. | |
| May 18, 2015 at 17:25 | comment | added | Pacerier | @voretaq7, Do you find no people that are both sysadmin cum developer? | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:30 | vote | accept | MetaChrome | ||
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:29 | comment | added | Ward - Trying Codidact Mod | Questions with useful answers shouldn't be deleted in general, and meta is different: downvotes don't cost you rep, and what they mean is different on meta - they generally mean "I disagree" which is what my downvote reflects - I disagree that SF's voting/closing is any different than any other SE site. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:25 | comment | added | MetaChrome | So fantastic, can you please delete this question? Now I'm being downvoted for a question I deleted regarding a meta I have no problem with. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:22 | comment | added | MetaChrome | 1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/a/image/1371/30/… Just put this in the question input form with an explanation regarding the meta and I guaruntee you'll never get another dumb question. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:18 | comment | added | MetaChrome | I mean the explicit meta of serverfault is in conflict with itself by nature of the fact that there is a misunderstanding of the purpose of the site because of its popularity. You can't possibly believe that you aren't going to get non sys admins posting questions on here unless there is a lot of education about the fact that there is an expectation that the audience is sys admins. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:13 | comment | added | MetaChrome | The problem comes down to the fact that, stackexchange has claimed to relegate all questions with regards to configuration of server software to serverfault while the community or the explicit meta of serverfault wants to maintain these question in the context of the "method" of system administration. Now that's an actual question worthy of discussion. If you really think that every question regarding configuration or executables can only be dealt with by system administrators or in the context of the the method of system adminstration, that's debateable, hence the friction. So superuser? | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:09 | comment | added | MetaChrome | Thanks Scott. I'll be sure to let you know of my further treatises on the manner. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:07 | comment | added | tombull89 | Merge SO and SF? Ulp. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:07 | comment | added | voretaq7 Mod | @MetaChrome I know you seem to agree on reconsideration - you're bright enough to read through Meta. I'm more concerned about the next person who comes along and doesn't take the time to understand why things are split the way they are - those are the people who think "devops" means just hiring a bunch of coders and giving them root on machines to do as they please (with predictable results) | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 18:05 | comment | added | Scott Pack | @MetaChrome: It is rather magnanimous of you to allow for the fact that a situation that exists in nearly every single IT organization larger than 10 employees. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 17:44 | comment | added | MetaChrome | To clarify once again, I deleted the question because I read the discussions with regards to the explicit meta of this site. I see the value of having said explicit meta, and the value the major contributers get from it or the efforts of said contributers. I dont really have the motivation to discuss the abstract paradigms of system administration or see the point of doing so. It's entirely possible that the paradigm you specify is entirely correct. | |
| S Dec 5, 2013 at 17:32 | history | answered | voretaq7Mod | CC BY-SA 3.0 | |
| S Dec 5, 2013 at 17:32 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by voretaq7Mod |
