to cut it short, when you provide a ready set of parameters to fill out, it actually will appeal to the more lazy of us, myself included, who will need only fill out the blanks instead of working hard(er) on asking the question in a right way. I do not want this to turn into a flame war, and I suppose you did not intend to make things personal or to make them sound so condescending, so I'll just ignore that part of your comment.

Sorry to cut you in mid flight, when you jump to conclusions so willingly, but the reason I view a small subset of questions on SF is simply because I am interested in a certain subset of topics, where I can contribute and learn at the same time. Templates, IMO, address that exact feature of the human element you highlighted - they provide a ready to fill out set of requirements, instead of going back and forth, which is a convenient thing, and not an extra bother. Of course there is no forcing of hands in filling out every detail in a template, but from my experience - people usually do

saying "this will not work" is hardly constructive. how about another approach, maybe a repository of such templates, we could point the topicstarters at, instead of manually typing out a list of command outputs and log locations?

@BartDeVos exactly :)

I haven't seen direct rejection... and these templates can be built up and connected to tags or tag conjunctions I suppose. Would make sense to ask the top posters in specific tag categories to provide templates

btw, those two are in meta.stackoverflow, not meta.serverfault. doesn't matter much, I know, but this would explain why these didn't pop up when I was typing this post in

you're right, obviously. does this make me wrong in re-asking?