Topic at hand: Advice needed on migrating shares from a 2003 DC to a new 2012: how can I avoid breaking my software install GPOs?

Long story short: I'm not an avid writer in the discussions here. Coming back from a Usenet age when people responded when they had something to offer, I'm being more and more drawn away from this environment.

I've written in plenty of forum and lists in the last 30 years and I must say that even though the discussions here are usually top-notch, personally thread handling has been a nightmarish experience. As I've written in my (banned/deleted) comment in the link at the top, it feels like there are a zillion of moderators abusing authors by downvoting/closing/deleting material.

Case in hand: I'm in the process of creating a current technology active directory (Server 2019) by migrating an old, 2003-based active directory. Personally, it wouldn't matter if the active directory was dated 5-, 10- or 1000-years ago. I have to import the AD data (users/policies/etc) to the new infrastructure. And I have had a very valid reason, an obstacle, which clearly received no answer (hence, a discussion that could welcome one at least solution).

Why would this thread be down-voted is beyond me, apart from the fact that rock stars have a zillion clicks in their youtube channels, and ground-breaking vids do not... Someone did not understand what the issue was about, I can live with that.

What I do not dig is why someone elected to actually close this thread. Would a thread asking info to port some ancient COBOL routines to C++ 19 also be closed by a mod?

Was the thread closed because server 2k3 is obosolete? But Server 2019 is not! Furthermore, is serverfault about only what is considered "current" in developed countries? Because, I can assure you there are a lot of countries out there for which a proliant ML350 G5 is state of the art.

This is the second or third time I've posted in these discussions and ended up with a closed thread. In some cases I've managed to take some useful information and in others I feel that I was guillotined by an over-zealous mod. Wouldn't post here right now, but I'm a bit on edge. So, looking out for opinions here mostly on what was wrong with the thread at the top. Still interested in what your "feel" here is.

  • > Would a thread asking info to port some ancient COBOL routines to C++ 19 also be closed by a mod? Almost certainly - that is off topic for Server Fault it may fly on Stack Overflow though. This place isn't Usenet or a mailing list or a forum. There are no threads/thread handling/discussions - just Questions and Answers.
    – user9517
    Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 9:50
  • OP asked a question; no discussion. And my reference to COBOL tried to serve as an example of attitude with regard to closing a thread because it partly references old/unsupported/ancient technology . The reference to Usenet was made to recall times when someone asks and whoever has something to contribute and wants to help, is free to do so. These points should be clear, yet I'd like to clarify them. In doing so, we both might have started a discussion. So, let's better try to address the heart of the OP...
    – carmik
    Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 13:58

1 Answer 1


Our community approach to content moderation, especially close-votes, recently was enhanced by a change that allowed three votes to code instead of the old standard of five votes. This means that three different people misread the intent of your question, which in my opinion is spot-on topic; we don't spend enough attention on the problem of bringing deeply legacy environments up to modern standards.

We do have a re-open queue, similar to the close queue. Perhaps this will spur people to vote to reopen.

  • Although the comment text reads "avoid thanks or +1 answers", I must say a "thanks" for taking the time to address me in a humane and explanative way, as well as actually delve into the issues of my OP... As for the re-open queue I don't know where it can be found, but I'll try.
    – carmik
    Commented Jul 2, 2021 at 4:47
  • 1
    @carmik Someone needs to nominate it for reopening. If I do it, it'll just get reopened. The three people who voted-to-close are very active users and could simply close it again if they disagree with me. Moderatorship is a limited godhood.
    – sysadmin1138 Mod
    Commented Jul 2, 2021 at 14:28
  • I think you meant "three votes to CLOSE". Commented Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .