Skip to main content
Server Fault

Return to Question

replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
Source Link
Community Bot
Community Bot
  • 1

Take this question: http://serverfault.com/questions/657861/changing-dns-from-godaddy-to-ovhhttps://serverfault.com/questions/657861/changing-dns-from-godaddy-to-ovh. With the old guidelines, I would have flagged the question as off-topic. The asker:

  • Does not know enough about their problem to include the right details.
  • Does not show sufficient skill in the technology under question to be able to work on it for pay.
  • Does not demonstrate knowledge of better-practices through how their environment is put together.

But I could not find enough information on the new guidelines, so I don't know if the question should be closed.

With the old guidelines, if the question was closed and the asker wondered what he did wrong, he could click on the word "professional" in the rationale for closing. The word was a link and took you to a place that explained what was required. But now, is "in a business environment" going to be a link? (It is not in the flagging pop-up.) And where is it going to take you?

My understanding of http://serverfault.com/help/on-topichttps://serverfault.com/help/on-topic is that, if the asker could be doing this for business, it is a valid question. Before, doing it for business was not enough. However, the rationale presented at Proposed change to Server Fault guidelines, round 2 seems to imply that the guideline change is more in wording than in policy. This is what confuses me.

Take this question: http://serverfault.com/questions/657861/changing-dns-from-godaddy-to-ovh. With the old guidelines, I would have flagged the question as off-topic. The asker:

  • Does not know enough about their problem to include the right details.
  • Does not show sufficient skill in the technology under question to be able to work on it for pay.
  • Does not demonstrate knowledge of better-practices through how their environment is put together.

But I could not find enough information on the new guidelines, so I don't know if the question should be closed.

With the old guidelines, if the question was closed and the asker wondered what he did wrong, he could click on the word "professional" in the rationale for closing. The word was a link and took you to a place that explained what was required. But now, is "in a business environment" going to be a link? (It is not in the flagging pop-up.) And where is it going to take you?

My understanding of http://serverfault.com/help/on-topic is that, if the asker could be doing this for business, it is a valid question. Before, doing it for business was not enough. However, the rationale presented at Proposed change to Server Fault guidelines, round 2 seems to imply that the guideline change is more in wording than in policy. This is what confuses me.

Take this question: https://serverfault.com/questions/657861/changing-dns-from-godaddy-to-ovh. With the old guidelines, I would have flagged the question as off-topic. The asker:

  • Does not know enough about their problem to include the right details.
  • Does not show sufficient skill in the technology under question to be able to work on it for pay.
  • Does not demonstrate knowledge of better-practices through how their environment is put together.

But I could not find enough information on the new guidelines, so I don't know if the question should be closed.

With the old guidelines, if the question was closed and the asker wondered what he did wrong, he could click on the word "professional" in the rationale for closing. The word was a link and took you to a place that explained what was required. But now, is "in a business environment" going to be a link? (It is not in the flagging pop-up.) And where is it going to take you?

My understanding of https://serverfault.com/help/on-topic is that, if the asker could be doing this for business, it is a valid question. Before, doing it for business was not enough. However, the rationale presented at Proposed change to Server Fault guidelines, round 2 seems to imply that the guideline change is more in wording than in policy. This is what confuses me.

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/ServerFault/status/552911647371984896
Source Link
Antonis Christofides
Antonis Christofides
  • 2.6k
  • 12
  • 5

Confused about the change from "professional" to "business environment"

Take this question: http://serverfault.com/questions/657861/changing-dns-from-godaddy-to-ovh. With the old guidelines, I would have flagged the question as off-topic. The asker:

  • Does not know enough about their problem to include the right details.
  • Does not show sufficient skill in the technology under question to be able to work on it for pay.
  • Does not demonstrate knowledge of better-practices through how their environment is put together.

But I could not find enough information on the new guidelines, so I don't know if the question should be closed.

With the old guidelines, if the question was closed and the asker wondered what he did wrong, he could click on the word "professional" in the rationale for closing. The word was a link and took you to a place that explained what was required. But now, is "in a business environment" going to be a link? (It is not in the flagging pop-up.) And where is it going to take you?

My understanding of http://serverfault.com/help/on-topic is that, if the asker could be doing this for business, it is a valid question. Before, doing it for business was not enough. However, the rationale presented at Proposed change to Server Fault guidelines, round 2 seems to imply that the guideline change is more in wording than in policy. This is what confuses me.