Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
No, and I agree with you. In the original case here, I think there is useful information in an answer that gives the question value as a whole. In the case of the VM image one you linked, I don't think there is (not least because the answer is, as it can really only be, "your question is bad and you should feel bad").
HN, you know I'd follow you into the trenches in pursuit of bad questions, but in this case, I do think the community is making a valid point (with respect to that other question, I agree that it's worthless, and have just piled on a close vote). That said, these are judgement calls; they can lawfully be disagreed over, without the other side's point of view being prima facie dumb.
I think the community view around these parts is pretty clearly that we expect people to do their homework - which almost always includes web searches - before posting here. I really, really don't want SF to becomes the first port of call for everyone with a problem that can easily be sorted with JFGI, and I won't be staying around if it does.
Why should one not cast the first close vote on the question you've linked to? It's one that a little elementary research would have answered, which to my mind makes it OT; I'm only grateful that JennyD got there before I did. I'd certainly rather see questions like that one closed than some fairly-harmless five-year-old cpanel relic with an accepted answer, that's not likely to come back from the grave and hurt anyone.
"It doesn't look like there's much value to the existing question and answer" I'd be more easily convinced by that if we didn't have a decently-rep'ped user testifying - less than a foot above this comment - that (s)he got value out of it .
In addition to snark, it does occur to me that one way to significantly improve the use of downvoting to handle bad questions would be to add up/down voting buttons in the "close" queue review tool. If I didn't have to open a new tab for each question that I'm reviewing - which takes nearly 10 seconds to load to the point that I can vote - I'd do it much more often.
Oh look, management drives by yet again, and yet again tells us that we can't try to manage the river of floaty brown questions the way we'd like to. @Shog9, you and I have personally talked about these issues before (if you remember); I was not then convinced that the paternalistic "we've seen this tried and it doesn't work" was valid, and I'm not convinced now.
"Moderator deletions and migrations are much more significant on SF" and may I say three cheers for our dedicated, indispensable, and rather-underpaid mods?
@Ninj I can't fault your understanding: meta is indeed different from the main site, and has a somewhat different set of practices (particularly as regards downvoting). I certainly wouldn't pre-populate answers on the main site.
@Ninj When I wrote the question, I also wrote two stock answers, one YES and one NO, for people who wished simply to vote without expressing further opinions. The comparitive votes on those two stock answers are the main reason I conclude that the community is in favour of such retagging. Anyone who wants to speak at more length in an answer is welcome to do so, and several have; but my main interest was not to persuade others but to take the community's viewpoint.
@SanuelJackson comments are not the place for this - or any other - discussion. If you think you can make a cogent argument for a change in cPanel policy, I urge you to make it in the appropriate way: post a question to meta arguing your case, and see if you can win community support. I have made some recommendations about how I think this might be best done, but whether you heed them is of course up to you.
Sorry, @SanuelJackson; "not likely to fail" what? I applaud you for requesting deletion of your original question, but I note that you don't need to ask a mod to do it; you can delete your own question with the link at the base of it. As regards hearings, I agree with you; as I said, you can't expect such in comments - discussions are not what comments are for. If you think there's a question to be asked, here on meta, go ahead and ask it. It will likely go better if you show awareness of previous discussions on the subject, and try to show how things have changed since then.
