Timeline for What to do with the "rm -rf" hoax question
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2016 at 21:56 | comment | added | Massimo | @MichaelHampton Well, I was remarking (on the assumption he was not a troll) how you need a really flawed setup to be able to delete all your servers, all your data and all your backups with a single command; that was not to be blamed on a mistake or bad luck, but on an astonishing series of design and implementation errors. And it looks like my remark was on point, because IIRC last time I saw it, it had 15 upvotes... | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 21:39 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @Massimo A Stack Overflow employee deleted your comments. I don't know exactly why, but I can guess. As some news outlets noted, they weren't exactly helpful... | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 21:35 | comment | added | Massimo | @MichaelHampton Do you know what happened to my comments, especially the one that had several upvotes and was even quoted in the Independent article? I don't understand why they were deleted, and I'd like them back, if possible; also, I'd really like to know why they have been deleted, while others have not. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 20:21 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @AndrewB Done. Thanks for the reminder. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 20:19 | comment | added | Andrew B | @Michael With that perception of brutal feedback in mind, you might also want to edit the "f*****" part out. While that was sufficient for "internal documentation" purposes, people who aren't going to run that URL through a translator need to understand that this was a publicity stunt. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 18:45 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @RоryMcCune I don't think that's what anyone really wants, and given that, I've undeleted the question for the time being. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 18:11 | comment | added | Rory McCune | you would think so but I've seen comments on "news" articles about this which mention the deletion but assume it was because the feedback on the problem got too "brutal" (whatever that's meant to mean) and not because it was a hoax | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 17:43 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | Deleting the question makes it pretty obvious what happened, too. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 15:06 | comment | added | Sven Mod | I would add a bit about this on top of the merged question to explain what happened. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 14:57 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek | The big advantage of this is since this question has had a lot of attention, if people follow the links back, least they know what happened. On the other hand, they'll know this guy didn't actually delete his entire company's data. On the gripping hand, I'm not sure that his 'official' excuse - that its a viral stunt, makes him look much better. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 at 13:34 | history | answered | SvenMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |