The third close-reason is currently:

Questions must be relevant to professional system administration. Server Fault is dedicated to professional system and network administrators. End user and enthusiast questions are off-topic (contact your system administrator or hire a professional to help you out). Please see the Help Center for more information.

We should remove this one for a few reasons:

1. It's frustrating to new users for a variety of reasons:

• The linked explanation is a wall-o-text. Ain't nobody got time for that.
• The person asking might well be a professional who is out of their depth, new to a technology, or has a hard time explaining their situation - to the point where it seems unprofessional.

2. It seems to be pointing to the person asking the question rather than the content of the question itself. I know this horse is dead and kicked plenty, but especially to people unfamiliar with the site, they take it personally.
3. There's no reason to use this close-reason in the first place.

• If the Question is bad, pick on the reasons that explains why it's bad. Not only are you still closing a bad question but the OP might have a clue as to why (without taking up your valuable time explaining in the comments).
• If the Question is good, but off-topic, it should be punted to the relevant site (usually SuperUser, Unix.SE, etc). If the site isn't in the migration list, just Flag it - Moderators will be all over that.
• In the rare case a question is good, but there is no relevant site, you might have to pick the "Other" reason and say "Good Q, but not here". I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a good question with no home anywhere on SE.

Related: We've been kicking around the idea of another close reason related to not having the required access to fix a problem, therefor the issue should be run up the flagpole within the organization or whoever maintains the relevant system. If anyone has some great thoughts on wording, feel free to open a new Question on mSF.

Edit:
I've removed what was point #3 as it really has nothing to do with my reasoning for wanting this close reason gone. There never was a good reason for this close reason and the remaining three points cover that completely.

Addressing the specific concern about allowing non-Professional Questions - NOBODY has proposed this. This close reason is just as invalid with or without that specific wording. Constantly misrepresenting what other people are proposing is a Strawman argument, members of this community can do better than arguing logical fallacies.

The third close-reason is currently:

Questions must be relevant to professional system administration. Server Fault is dedicated to professional system and network administrators. End user and enthusiast questions are off-topic (contact your system administrator or hire a professional to help you out). Please see the Help Center for more information.

We should remove this one for a few reasons:

1. It's frustrating to new users for a variety of reasons:

• The linked explanation is a wall-o-text. Ain't nobody got time for that.
• The person asking might well be a professional who is out of their depth, new to a technology, or has a hard time explaining their situation - to the point where it seems unprofessional.

2. It seems to be pointing to the person asking the question rather than the content of the question itself. I know this horse is dead and kicked plenty, but especially to people unfamiliar with the site, they take it personally.
3. There's no reason to use this close-reason in the first place.

• If the Question is bad, pick on the reasons that explains why it's bad. Not only are you still closing a bad question but the OP might have a clue as to why (without taking up your valuable time explaining in the comments).
• If the Question is good, but off-topic, it should be punted to the relevant site (usually SuperUser, Unix.SE, etc). If the site isn't in the migration list, just Flag it - Moderators will be all over that.
• In the rare case a question is good, but there is no relevant site, you might have to pick the "Other" reason and say "Good Q, but not here". I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a good question with no home anywhere on SE.

Related: We've been kicking around the idea of another close reason related to not having the required access to fix a problem, therefor the issue should be run up the flagpole within the organization or whoever maintains the relevant system. If anyone has some great thoughts on wording, feel free to open a new Question on mSF.

Edit:
I've removed what was point #3 as it really has nothing to do with my reasoning for wanting this close reason gone. There never was a good reason for this close reason and the remaining three points cover that completely.

Addressing the specific concern about allowing non-Professional Questions - NOBODY has proposed this. This close reason is just as invalid with or without that specific wording. Constantly misrepresenting what other people are proposing is a Strawman argument, members of this community can do better than arguing logical fallacies.

The third close-reason is currently:

Questions must be relevant to professional system administration. Server Fault is dedicated to professional system and network administrators. End user and enthusiast questions are off-topic (contact your system administrator or hire a professional to help you out). Please see the Help Center for more information.

We should remove this one for a few reasons:

1. It's frustrating to new users for a variety of reasons:

• The linked explanation is a wall-o-text. Ain't nobody got time for that.
• The person asking might well be a professional who is out of their depth, new to a technology, or has a hard time explaining their situation - to the point where it seems unprofessional.

2. It seems to be pointing to the person asking the question rather than the content of the question itself. I know this horse is dead and kicked plenty, but especially to people unfamiliar with the site, they take it personally.
3. We've been discussing removing the word "professional" from the site's topic. At the very least this close reason would have to be rewritten to also fit the new topic. Even now, the topic is worded differently from this close-reason.
4. There's no reason to use this close-reason in the first place.

• If the Question is bad, pick on the reasons that explains why it's bad. Not only are you still closing a bad question but the OP might have a clue as to why (without taking up your valuable time explaining in the comments).
• If the Question is good, but off-topic, it should be punted to the relevant site (usually SuperUser, Unix.SE, etc). If the site isn't in the migration list, just Flag it - Moderators will be all over that.
• In the rare case a question is good, but there is no relevant site, you might have to pick the "Other" reason and say "Good Q, but not here". I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a good question with no home anywhere on SE.

Related: We've been kicking around the idea of another close reason related to not having the required access to fix a problem, therefor the issue should be run up the flagpole within the organization or whoever maintains the relevant system. If anyone has some great thoughts on wording, feel free to open a new Question on mSF.

The third close-reason is currently:

Questions must be relevant to professional system administration. Server Fault is dedicated to professional system and network administrators. End user and enthusiast questions are off-topic (contact your system administrator or hire a professional to help you out). Please see the Help Center for more information.

We should remove this one for a few reasons:

1. It's frustrating to new users for a variety of reasons:

• The linked explanation is a wall-o-text. Ain't nobody got time for that.
• The person asking might well be a professional who is out of their depth, new to a technology, or has a hard time explaining their situation - to the point where it seems unprofessional.

2. It seems to be pointing to the person asking the question rather than the content of the question itself. I know this horse is dead and kicked plenty, but especially to people unfamiliar with the site, they take it personally.
3. There's no reason to use this close-reason in the first place.

• If the Question is bad, pick on the reasons that explains why it's bad. Not only are you still closing a bad question but the OP might have a clue as to why (without taking up your valuable time explaining in the comments).
• If the Question is good, but off-topic, it should be punted to the relevant site (usually SuperUser, Unix.SE, etc). If the site isn't in the migration list, just Flag it - Moderators will be all over that.
• In the rare case a question is good, but there is no relevant site, you might have to pick the "Other" reason and say "Good Q, but not here". I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a good question with no home anywhere on SE.

Related: We've been kicking around the idea of another close reason related to not having the required access to fix a problem, therefor the issue should be run up the flagpole within the organization or whoever maintains the relevant system. If anyone has some great thoughts on wording, feel free to open a new Question on mSF.

Edit:
I've removed what was point #3 as it really has nothing to do with my reasoning for wanting this close reason gone. There never was a good reason for this close reason and the remaining three points cover that completely.

Addressing the specific concern about allowing non-Professional Questions - NOBODY has proposed this. This close reason is just as invalid with or without that specific wording. Constantly misrepresenting what other people are proposing is a Strawman argument, members of this community can do better than arguing logical fallacies.