Skip to main content
Commonmark migration
Source Link

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

 

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

 

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

 

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

 

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
Source Link

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominatorbeen forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

added 17 characters in body
Source Link
user9517
  • 116.8k
  • 4
  • 55
  • 131

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

I'd like to see it make a come back, there are far too many people asking questions that are basically HALP ! I have no idea what I'm doing or where to start. Please guide me.

The quality of questions on SF has continued to decline to the point where now instead of a river of crap we have an Amazon Basin full of shit and it ain't getting any better. This is entirely because SF has been forced to sink to the lowest common denominator - that of clueless noob. It would great if we got even 10% of our questions that were professional quality from anyone.

The ""reasonable business information technology management practices" close reason seems somewhat underused and would probably be good candidate for replacement.

In the mean time use a custom close reson, this is one that I have stolen from @wesley which seems to fit the bill entirely.

This question is being voted for closure because the author does not show a level of technical understanding or appropriate due diligence in researching the topic that the community judges as being a minimum barrier to participate.

I am also having some success with custom close reasons like

... because Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service.

... because Server fault should not be expected to provide Reading Error Messages as a Service

... Serverfault is for Q&A not Remote Diagnostics as a Service.

edited body
Source Link
user9517
  • 116.8k
  • 4
  • 55
  • 131
Loading
deleted 1 character in body
Source Link
user9517
  • 116.8k
  • 4
  • 55
  • 131
Loading
Source Link
user9517
  • 116.8k
  • 4
  • 55
  • 131
Loading