Timeline for What is server fault for?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 4, 2014 at 15:29 | comment | added | user9517 | The line is between allowing a community to coalesce around a topic, of which we have many and driving your customers here which we don't think is a good thing. See this answer here which I believe is still relevant. | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 14:37 | comment | added | TSG | I've posted on the topic above you linked above. I have no doubt there is a fine line here - balancing the desire to attract users and quality answers to SF, with avoiding low-value or overly narrow how to questions. | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 13:59 | comment | added | TSG | We encourage everyone to use serverfault to support each other (all SF members should be doing that). We don't direct customers to server fault (support for customers is by email). If customers can create a body of knowledge from well structured and well answered questions it fits the purpose of SF. This is boiling down to should reps from answer questions about product if they work for the mfg of the product. | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 6:07 | comment | added | user9517 | This aught to be it's own question. This previous discussion here on SF is relevant meta.serverfault.com/questions/5241/…. You you should not direct users of your community edition here. This community is not your unpaid support channel. Also relevant meta.stackexchange.com/questions/234700/… | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 3:38 | comment | added | EEAA | Having support reps answer questions is not the problem. The problem is when you direct your users here for tech support. | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 0:34 | history | edited | TSG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 18 characters in body
|
| Jul 3, 2014 at 23:31 | history | answered | TSG | CC BY-SA 3.0 |