Ok, is a good information, but it is off topic. The problem is that with the amount of votes that both Question and Answer have, we would need 4-5 10kers to delete it, but sadly we don't have that many +10kers users active that would check the delete queue on regular basis. So, if mods ain't going to migrate the question to UL, the only course of action is deletion.
Why delete? This question looks fine to me, aside from not being about Ubuntu. It could be migrated to Unix & Linux.
(Why doesn't AU have a migration path to U&L anyway? There are many of decent questions about Ubuntu derivatives.)
This question was well written, upvoted, featured, and had 6 upvotes.
Unfortunately the OP made a mistake to admit they are on Mint in a comment, and to add screenshots with a Mint theme.
Does this justify to edit the question for putting "Linux Mint" into the title, and to tag it with mint?
This edit consequently led to downvotes, and close votes.
It may have been good to edit the title and tags if the question was all about Mint, a Mint bug, or procedures only valid for Mint. But as far as I can judge it this was not so here. It was a well written question on configuring Cinnamon (which per se it not off topic here).
We probably should put more effort in closing and deleting the many really bad questions but not in hunting borderline cases which were nicely resolved.
Let's try to be as objective as possible in the ideology of Mint vs. Ubuntu:
- You can install cinnamon in 13.10.
- The answerer found that it's actually a
- The asker agreed and accepted the answer.
- He even awarded a bounty.
Despite being off-topic, everything else that the asker and answerer show there is good citizenship and how the site should work. Now we just need someone kindly enough to take the question to the Stack Exchange instance where it should belong to and kindly remind the users to ask non-Ubuntu questions not at AskUbuntu.
In short: Handle things gracefully.
Let me reiterate: We have all this fuzz and ideology war over a simple syntax error.
One shouldn't be that obsessed with keeping the site clean, that he actually thinks of deleting useful - and not by any means harmful - content and questions, where users also show good citizenship (but someone accidentally said the word "Jehovah"), just because that's the only thing he can do for now.
Honestly, we're not that different. I'm a stubborn old goat at times (as you of all people know) but if I see things going this far, I try to step back and listen to what other people are telling me.
In this particular case it might not be a vote against what you're saying but one against how you're saying it. Personally I took particular issue with the phrase:
... the only course of action ...
It's literally incorrect and even by our rules and guidelines, it's just not true here. This question has multiple options:
- We could sanitise it and re-open it — it applies to us and it's a good question
- We could close and leave it and do something useful today
- We could close-dupe it against an Ubuntu-centric version if that exists
- We could migrate it to somewhere Mint is on-topic
- We could delete it — depriving the internet of its wisdom and its users of their reputation.
These options won't always apply for every question about Mint and other examples might have extra options, I'm just trying to highlight that the argument you've picked doesn't benefit us, it's pure compliance. The other options are much less destructive.
Ask Ubuntu is a question and answer site for Ubuntu users and developers.
This is a site about Ubuntu, plain in simple. If we have questions that are clearly Mint-specific, we become a Mint site and that's potentially confusing to future users.
Sure, it's useful, but just because something is useful doesn't mean it belongs here, so we should migrate it. If we can't migrate it, I for one see no reason why it should not be deleted straight away for the simple reason that it doesn't belong here.
I agree with handling things gracefully. I also agree that having simple rules which are easily understood and do not need case-by-case interpretation is very important for wider community participation.
I think in such instances if we wish to keep the QA in AU, textual reference to Mint should be removed; even the image could be obscured a bit.
If OP insists on leaving text and image unchanged, migrate to U&L.
I think we should actually just reopen the question.
Should we close questions where someone is using Linux Mint and not Ubuntu? Yes. But we don't have to be so rigid about it as to close questions that already have clearly useful, upvoted answers that are fully applicable to Ubuntu and are already helping Ubuntu users.
Now, it's understandable why it was closed, since to a extent it is about Cinnamon, and Cinnamon is part of Mint while not ordinarily being part of Ubuntu. Cinnamon is also available for Ubuntu but it's used by a much smaller fraction of Ubuntu users. But it is available for Ubuntu. We have many other Cinnamon questions open on the site. Assuming the question and answer happen to apply equally well to Cinnamon on Ubuntu, I think we should reopen this.
Another benefit of reopening the question is that it would allow more answers to be posted, so if there are any issues specific to this problem for people who use Cinnamon on Ubuntu, new answers could address them. There seems to be a strong sense in the community that there's something of value to us in this question; reopening it would let people contribute answers that fill any gaps that may currently exist in its applicability to Ubuntu users.
So, in summary: If we're prepared to keep this on the site because it's helpful to Ubuntu users, then it doesn't need to remain closed. If not, or if there is no consensus about what the question's status should be, we're not under any special obligation to do anything to it. But to an extent I agree with Braiam: While we shouldn't delete this, we should strongly consider migrating it to Unix.SE if we really consider it inappropriate for Ask Ubuntu. Although I totally disagree with the idea that we have to delete useful content to achieve perfect policy compliance, I think it was reasonable and valuable for Braiam to post about this issue on meta.
It's tempting to think of every question as an opportunity to set precedent for the way future questions will be handled. There is some truth to this mindset; sometimes inconsistencies can be confusing, and we should consider what will happen later as a result of how we handle questions now. But foolish or pointless consistency is no better than inconsistency. A question is first an opportunity to help all Ubuntu users (and other site visitors), a second an opportunity to help the OP (a close second), and third an opportunity to shape site policy (a distant third).
If anyone has tested a fix for Ubuntu + Cinnamon, I suggest making a new Question that is well documented with a self answer.
- Keep the original answer tailored for the asker, on the original question.
- Allow a form of the question to be on the site.
- Not encourage falsifying information.