Answer one canonical "why did my [W/X/M]AMP server get hacked" question, and mark the rest as duplicates. But I absolutely think that it is the wrong thing to close "how do I do [x] in [W/X/M]AMP" out-of-hand.

I think that the canonical question is a good idea (serverfault.com/questions/453617/why-not-use-a-wamp-stack), but I wholeheartedly but respectfully disagree with @JohnGardeniers - our place in this community is not to determine what tools, install methods, etc are "professional" and are not. Many do/have hold the opinion that using Windows is cause to be called "unprofessional" as a SysAd. This is a question-and-answer site; let people ask questions. If nobody wants to answer the question, it'll fall off the grid, but right now we are being hostile to the potential new users.

It's more likely to be a people-problem than a technical-folks problem. The parsing libraries example is very apropos, but my personal favorite example is terminal applications.

" ...You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.' But the plans were on display...' on display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.' That's the display department.' With a torch.' Ah, well the lights had probably gone.' So had the stairs.' But look you found the notice didn't you?' Yes,' said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard".' -- Douglas Adams.

So, we're back to what - to me - the original question was: How can we make the canonical questions more accessible/apparent/visible to our userbase? As it's been discussed elsewhere, an oft-edited answer on MSF is none of those three.

In re-reading things, is it just that one question that the tag is being called into question, the application of the tag, or the tag in general? We've touched upon all three.

I have no problem with that tag being for mod use only, but is my not being a mod an issue? If changes I (or anyone else) make are determined to be 'for the worst', it can be rolled back. If I (/they) get obnoxious about redoing changes, restrictions/banning happens.

@JohnGardeniers From what I read, it seems that you and I are in complete agreement (with several other in support) about the solution, with the main point of contention being some people's dislike of a meta-tag. Is the contention being brought up is that I went ahead and did it without consent?

I was attempting to help make useful information more accessible, but if my efforts were unwelcome, nuke as you see fit. Regardless, I still look forward to seeing this information made more accessible. I mean that with every possible sense of honesty and sincerity.

I wish I'd seen that post before doing that work, but as @John Gardeniers pointed out in that thread, without the tag, the only way to discover these questions we consider Canonical is to 1) know about the meta discussion, and then browse it hoping for the topic that you're looking for, and finally clicking on that link.

@HopelessN00b Your recruiter lied to you if you thought that being a SysAd would get you away from stupid/lazy questions...

Asking for benchmarks is an exercise in futility. Benchmarking is your responsibility, as only you can reliably test your workload in your environment. Anybody can give you numbers, but they won't matter a lick of difference to you.

I cannot upvote this enough.

Adding '%best%' somewhere in there would probably help; that word really hits the Shopping criteria for me.