2

This is regarding a question about master and slave drives. By the time Gareth completed an edit, the question was rather straightforward.

Being familiar with the technology, I found the question rather clear. (It could have been made more clear by mentioning PATA, but there was a PATA tag, so it was fine. Yet @random closed it, as "not a real question".

That was a decision that I'm not understanding. (Such a decision would have made a lot more sense with the question's original form, but not by the time random closed it.)

Is there some criteria that is expected to be followed to determine when that reason is to be applicable? (If not, how would such a decision be sensibly reversible?)

  • @JourneymanGeek : Yes, I realize I'm talking about an old event. Yes, I realize that Gareth's edit was done before the closure. Since Gareth's edit helped make the question more readable, I'm not understanding the closure. (I would understand the closure if it came before some of the earlier edits.) Your last statement seems to be reinforcing what I said, not contradicting it. – TOOGAM Feb 19 '17 at 13:59
  • I'm doubtful anyone would remember the exact reasons after so long. And I was converting it into an answer. – Journeyman Geek Feb 19 '17 at 14:00
1

The original closure was done on August 22nd 2011. That's almost 5-6 years ago, and I'd guess it was for low quality. I'm guessing cause I doubt anyone would remember why after so long. Gareth's edit went through - and Michael Kjorling bumped it up cause he was getting rid of the master-slave meta tag (Words Have Been Had).

And lets be straight here. Its 2017. Less people get the master/slave/cable select topology than they did when the question was asked. We should probably find a canonical question or create a stellar question as the canonical one. Then open and close this as a dupe, if we so choose.

I'd totally do this but... I don't have any pata cables.

1

Back then and reading it now would still close it as not a real question. Or in today's vernacular, unclear what you're asking, or too broad.

There is no context. There is no background. There is no want or parameters on what any of it they're having an issue understanding. The edit makes it readable. The edit does not make it a fully written question.

It still reads like the start of a question.

  • Thank you for nicely chiming in (particularly considering the topic: a question that you closed years ago). – TOOGAM Feb 20 '17 at 5:45
  • 2
    Even before the first edit, it was real question, with a real answer. It's been so long I can't be sure, but I'd bet I've answered that exact question, in person, dozens of times in decades past. As late as '04 when I got my A+ Certificate, that same question was in the study materials. With no context, background, or parameters. Simple, direct, uncluttered question, with a verifiable and definitive answer. What more could a Q&A site wish for? A similarly concise question could be, "What's the difference between MDA and CGA cards?" – Gypsy Spellweaver Feb 20 '17 at 10:00
  • Super User is not a stand in for basic reading/research. The answers maybe written that way, but the questions need to express a level of scope that presents the problem and the attempt(s) at understanding/resolution. – random Feb 20 '17 at 14:04
  • 1
    No offense intended. I'm new to SU, and SE, but not to computers, and as such I may consider the Q pedestrian, but having answered it often enough I also know it is common, or was before SATA. Reading a full page of Google results didn't really answer the Q, I know the "fine manual" never did. The difference only seems relative to a power user, most would set the jumpers and be go. "What topics can I ask about here?" seems, to me, to suggest that this is the place for that Q. Hardware is even the first thing listed. (Trying to learn the system here.) – Gypsy Spellweaver Feb 22 '17 at 2:50
  • 1
    It was NOT a good question because the answers are wider then sticky noodles on the cabinets when making well noodles. If it was a good question it would have drawn excellent well researched documented answers. Question was on topic but it wasn't well researched and it was broad in scope – Ramhound Feb 22 '17 at 4:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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