Timeline for My bounty was returned - Why?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2020 at 10:00 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 4, 2014 at 6:05 | comment | added | MadHatter | As I am known not be a fan of your question, I hesitate to get involved in this discussion. But I think it fair to say that I'm pretty sure that Wesley has indeed read that blog article, and I'll bet more than once. The way SF is set up, you have a perfect right to make the argument you are doing (and I'm pleased to see you doing so, because it helps clarify whether things done with privilege were also done with broader community support) - but please try to avoid ad hominem attacks while doing so. | |
| S May 3, 2014 at 23:28 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 3, 2014 at 23:28 | history | unlocked | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 2, 2014 at 23:01 | history | notice added | voretaq7Mod | Comments only | |
| S May 2, 2014 at 23:01 | history | locked | voretaq7Mod | ||
| May 2, 2014 at 22:58 | comment | added | Matt | You clearly did not read the blog article. It says they are not recommended when they can provide a "laundry list" of results or when they are only valid for a very specific point in time. Considering that Seagate disks have supported this feature for a very long time would not qualify as either a laundry list or a very specific point in time. Please explain specifically how it the blog post says it is not allowed. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 22:52 | comment | added | Wesley |
@mattburnett Nope. You're still not getting it. Your question can only be answered with a product recommendation. It doesn't matter how obscure something is, if the features are not advertised, or if only a smattering of vendors offer it. "asking which few vendors do support them does certainly qualify as being acceptable according to the blog entry" No, no it doesn't, and the blog post clearly explains that.
|
|
| May 2, 2014 at 22:50 | comment | added | Matt | @Wesley, to address your edit the blog post explicitly states that shopping lists are acceptable in certain circumstances. It says they are not acceptable when they could provide a laundry list, but are when I "ask us what you need to learn to tell what you should buy." Since these features are generally not advertised such as Seagate's Verify On Write setting, asking which few vendors do support them does certainly qualify as being acceptable according to the blog entry. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 22:45 | comment | added | Matt | @Iain, it was not unanswerable, in fact one person provided a answer to half of my question. My bounty was not removed until I had said that I would award it to him. Presumably as a vindictive act. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 22:40 | comment | added | user9517 | @mattburnett if we allow you admittedly pretty unanswerable shopping question someone will use it as a reason to allow their shopping question - Broken Windows | |
| May 2, 2014 at 22:36 | comment | added | Wesley | @mattburnett Irrelevant. I amended my answer. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 22:36 | history | edited | Wesley | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 916 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2014 at 22:25 | comment | added | Matt | The blog post says the former is unacceptable because it "provides the path of least resistance: a laundry list of products I can buy without thinking about it too much". The features I listed are very obscure and were could not qualify has having a laundry list of answers. The very fact that no one was able of offering single RAID controller which had those features further proves my point. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 22:24 | history | edited | Wesley | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2014 at 22:18 | history | answered | Wesley | CC BY-SA 3.0 |