Timeline for Why was this question on remotely wiping deleted?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2015 at 10:54 | comment | added | MadHatter | I wouldn't, myself. I think the old question is better written, and has better answers. | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 9:40 | comment | added | Reaces | Would it be odd to recreate this question as a properly written Q&A self-answer, and locking the old one as a dupe to that one? As it stands I spent some time yesterday on the new (deleted) question, and did not at any time come across that old question. It's somewhat badly worded and judging by the amount of comments yesterday, the question might merit some fresh attention? | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 9:30 | comment | added | MadHatter | Fair enough! Then to be clear, I think I completely agree with you! And thanks for being so gracious during the course of this discussion - I, too, felt bad, because I hadn't spent the time required to find the dupe (yaaay Michael). | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 9:22 | comment | added | kasperd | And to be clear. I don't think the answer provided by the OP adds any value. However the question along with a quality answer such as serverfault.com/a/159411/214507 would add value. I wrote this meta question without knowing that the question was in fact a duplicate. | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 9:15 | comment | added | kasperd | I have updated my question. If serverfault.com/questions/159401/… had not existed, the deleted question (and the answer which @fukawi2 could have provided) would have added value to the site. But given the existence of the older question, the deleted question should have been closed as a duplicate and in that case would only serve as a help to make that older question easier to find. | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 9:00 | comment | added | MadHatter | Fair points. Your question title is specifically about the deletion, to which I was not party, and on which perhaps I should not comment. Given that you accept it deserved closure, however, perhaps you could edit your question to make that clear (which it currently does not), and clarify why you think this particular question, once closed, adds value in not being deleted? | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 8:40 | comment | added | kasperd | I agree the deleted question isn't perfect. Including information about the software currently installed on the host would have made it better. I also agree that the OP hadn't thought enough about the task (focusing too much on the shutting down part and too little on the reliability of the wiping). But in this particular case that would not have gotten in the way of providing an answer which both answers the question as stated and points out what the OP hasn't payed attention to. I'm not disputing the question being closed, but I do think it was deleted prematurely. | |
| Mar 27, 2015 at 8:27 | history | answered | MadHatter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |