I've been using this as a close vote reason:

> This question is being voted for closure because the question has made
> mention that a server control panel is installed on the system. Server
> control panels can and will modify aspects of a server (including but
> not limited to system tools, shells, and the kernel itself), that make
> any and all operations unpredictable. The ServerFault community is
> largely in agreement that standard and repeatable solutions are
> unlikely and inconsistent results are so common that we often choose
> to close questions sush as that.

Which could be re-written for a closure reason (as opposed as just a voting to close reason):

> This question was closed because it involves, whether directly or indirectly, a server control panel. Server
> control panels can and will modify aspects of a system (including but
> not limited to default system tools, standard packages, shells, and the kernel itself), which makes
> any and all operations unpredictable. As a result the ServerFault community cannot offer standard and repeatable solutions to any problem, no matter how tangentially related.

Add links as necessary? There seems to be a metric-bazillion different FAQs, links, canonical answers, and the like that have been referenced concerning this topic.