@Daniel Oh, we have an "operating system" tag too. I'm not sure how I feel about it, but it does seem to have some meaningful uses for theoretical questions or questions that relate to operating systems in general, rather than a specific OS.

Link to the user's edit history, for anyone wishing to reapply that tag.

@Daniel It's me. Ward's not saying that some noob is doing it, Ward is referring to me with the last half of my nick.

Close queue is at 195 right now, FWIW. So yes, as has been the case for quite a while, there are not enough active members of the community to process the close review queue.

@Wesley I mean to say that there are 5 OT close reasons in the UI. I don't think there's any question as to how quickly a certain someone would yank the diamond of a moderator who used one of those slots for a brutally honest close reason like Your question is bad and you should feel bad. GO AWAY.

@niceman Not just you, that particular close reason leaves a lot to be desired. A question like this would probably be accepted over on Super User.

@niceman It's more than just him. I'd expect it to get closed with: Questions should demonstrate reasonable business information technology management practices. Questions that relate to unsupported hardware or software platforms or unmaintained environments may not be suitable for Server Fault - see the help center.

@Reaces I hope that's the case, but the wording makes me suspect it's not. I have a service, for which I have to develop [...] a mechanism which issues notification to the administrator if it fails. Typically, the notification mechanism would be a monitoring service sending out an email/SMS to an administrator, and the mechanism for detecting failure would be... using your monitoring system to monitor the service in question. I really don't see how either requires development effort, unless, of course, he's trying develop a monitoring system specifically for/into this service he mentions.

@MikeyT.K. Great. You volunteering to answer perfectly reasonable questions about deploying Windows 3.11? For that matter, I'm having trouble getting my copy of GM-NAA_I/O working properly. Please to be performing the needful.

If you think you are out of your depth working on this issue, I don't think it's a good idea to rely on their abilities to properly assess their situation, particularly when we've just VTCed/closed their question for not being able to properly assess whether it belongs here or not. I think it would be better to use something more declarative, like" `it may be advisable for you to undertake additional training, hire a professional, or even die in a fire (to suffer for the horrible thing you asked about doing)."

@Massimo It's pretty common, actually... they'll @ someone asking why their question got closed/downvoted or what was wrong with it, and then get pissed off and start flaming when they get an answer (even a polite one). Reason #47 I stopped bothering to try to explain my votes, or help people improve. They'd just get pissed off, and as fun as it was snarking back at them, mod flags would get thrown, no-no mod messages would be sent, blah, blah, blah. Too much drama, especially when all too often the answer is that the question is just bad, and that's all there is to say about it.

...and now that it's been voted down to -3, it's now accepting delete votes from the community... if there's anyone else around who has that priv.

@TJSaunders <shrug> That would just shift the disruption to a moderator, which is not an improvement. I personally think you're worrying too much. SE doesn't care about it enough to anything to fix it (it's been a well known issue for years), and there aren't enough quality questions or participation from whatever's left of the community on ServerFault that disrupting the active view makes much of a difference anyway. Now the active view is flooded with recently edited questions about ftp, rather than the usual flood of completely useless crap. Having a hard time finding a problem in that.