Ok, lets face it. Those kind of data are not reliable when we talk about FOSS software, and asking what is the most popular/downloaded/used/insert-counter-here (IMO the first and third are very opinion based) is not reliable. I'm all out to help people, just not in the main site. They could ask in chat, in a Forum, in Discourse, elsewhere they could get a hand-help, but asking us for raw or processed data (which is ultimately what the questioner will want) wouldn't fit the autoritaviness model of the site.

Again, I'm not trying to diagre for the sake of disagreeing, I'm worried about what this Pandora Boxes could bring to us and I sincerely don't want us scoping this kind of questions.

(BTW, I know that there was a optional package called popularity contest, which would provide some insight, seems that USC offers something similar but I wouldn't take that data as a source of information for serious investigation)

  • 4
    Asking for data is not really something we can consider on topic since it cannot be provided, asking if there is data should be fine though. Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 18:36
  • 1
    @BrunoPereira Ok, that sounds like an answer, no?
    – Braiam
    Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 21:30

1 Answer 1


Not every question needs to be (nor could be) a Wikipedia-level-annotated, Pulitzer-winning question. We have thousands of examples of quick and dirty questions that exist in order to help somebody answer a simple question about Ubuntu.

The base question for this is an example of that. Somebody wants to know something. The original wanted numbers for a specific release but was edited (hours before you voted to close it) to ask a much more general and useful question.

In answer to your actual question (which is more about demanding statistics), see if you can answer the question before trying to close it. If you can write an answer, and explain how you came up with that answer, that's almost certainly the very best outcome for everybody involved.

Does adopting this inclusive stance mean there will be less-than-ideal questions? Sure. Does the policy alone mean there'll be an avalanche of new barely-on-topic posts? Almost certainly not. We're the only two people who read meta anyway :)

  • 1
    Make that three.
    – Seth
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 2:24
  • @Seth apparently is 4 ;). BTW, that is sad...
    – Braiam
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 12:43
  • @Seth Not sure how you took that last line... You ended with a full-stop and not a smiley so I'm imagining your face as D:< — I really just meant that people who ask these questions aren't going to read obscure meta threads before asking. We're frankly lucky if they get as far as the FAQ.
    – Oli Mod
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 12:51
  • @Oli Yes, I understood how you meant it, but was on mobile so no smilies ;)
    – Seth
    Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 17:13

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .