Btw, I think the Unix SE and the Askubuntu would be probably very glad to get a large part of the rejected questions here, maybe a cross-site cooperation could help a lot for everybody.

Mainly I agree you, but I think the site would need a clearly communicated vision for that. A possible vision is to create an "elite community" of sysadms, with high step-in requirements and with a strong quality control. Another way would be to produce a not so elite, but big, friendly, and not very LQ site. There are many examples for both on the SE, and also for the sites who are simply unable to decide. Imho in all of the cases it would be very important to treat the offtopic content, from cooperative OPs as nicely as it is only possible (i.e. by migrating them).

It is unavoidable, most professional sysadms have only a little need to ask.

Mainly I agree, except (2): in my opinion, the administrative permissions of the sysadms are generally more restrict in professional environment. Typically, they have access only to a small part of a complex system, and nobody really has full access on the whole (except maybe some boss, but he doesn't really use it).

You know what chance have such requests (I estimate around -15 on the meta SE + no responsible people will react), but I will try it. :-)

This made my day :-)

@JourneymanGeek SNI exists since winvista+ie7... but there are other unexplained problems as well, although many of them are not SF-related, for example the lack of latex support on the chat and on many sites.

@JourneymanGeek Thanks! So it is only worse, but not catastrophal. I think the idea is good, although I would start it from a different direction: I would list the most trivial and annoying longstanding problems (f.e.: https support on the meta sites) and then ask, how are these going if they have so many dev resources :-)

@JourneymanGeek Where? How?

@Reaces It is disgusting, unergonomic, suboptimal. And it is fixed to the top (you will see it even if you scroll down).