I'm a fairly green user to server fault, and admittedly to server management. I asked this question regarding an issue with virtualbox which was placed on hold on the basis of
Questions on Server Fault must be about managing information technology systems in a business environment. Home and end-user computing questions may be asked on Super User, and questions about development, testing and development tools may be asked on Stack Overflow."
Furthermore the Moderator claimed
Virtualbox as a desktop virt tool doesn't fit on Server Fault.
VBox is a desktop virt tool used for software development and/or home/lab use. We are interested in questions dealing with production environments (VBox is not suited for those).
Researching this topic on Meta shows that the question of the relevance regarding VirtualBox dates back to 2011 here.
If the consensus shifted (or is shifting) on an entire class of questions then is it not much more helpful to provide that context or link to a meta post that explains the context.
Why I am asking this question
IMO as a Q&A site, it's very important for users such as myself who are new to ServerFault, are not aware of the nuances or consensus of Server Fault, and/or (admittedly) are learning to manage information technology systems in a business environment to have a clear understanding of what is and isn't on topic. Simply stating that X is off topic without a clear explanation is not helpful. This is especially true when the 955 questions and tag on the very subject give users such as myself the impression that Server Fault does support Virtual Box Questions.
Why this came up
Considering the above quote regarding
managing information technology systems in a business environment, allow me to explain why this issue came up in the first place. With respect to business environments, my company normally hosts VMs on Azure and discovered a use case to boot VMs in-office for development and testing. Given our need for a hypervisor software and our lack of a background in hypervisor software, we initially looked at VMWare and Hypervisor but were ultimately attracted to Virtual Box because it is free of cost, open source, and supported on Windows 7. Undoubtedly this is also attractive to other organizations who may not be aware of the nuances of hypervisor software (as was the case for my employer) for similar reasons. Between this meta question and this meta question, it appears that the business environment / IT systems depends on the software being used or the context of the usage of the software (environment). Understandably, experts on Hypervisor would suggest VMWare or HyperVisor (windows 10?) as being better suited for production (I would concur).
Instead of arguing the merits of Virtual Box questions myself, I am instead posing the following question:
Is there a canonical answer or consensus on the relevance of Virtual Box Questions on Server Fault?
To be clear, I am not here to dispute the hold on my question. If Server Fault does not support questions about virtual box then the question should indeed be closed or better. Similarly as in the 2011 meta post, virtual box questions should be updated accordingly and this change made crystal clear in the tag, help page, or meta post such as this one. Furthermore, I found an answer to my original question on Super User here: namely Azure VHDs are not supported by Virtual Box.
What makes virtual box off topic on server fault?In two words: the moderator.