-2

I do not understand why a question about issues with archive.is was migrated and now put on hold, whereas questions about date back to 2010 (probably before Web Apps SE was even created, due to incoming migrations), which is tagged on 24 questions.

How's archive.is so fundamentally different from archive.org as a webapp as to require such actions?

Are moderators trying to advance an agenda against popular independent sites without venture capital? Where's the explanation for the reasoning of a misplaced migration of the question?

The archive.today website is certainly a webapp. Questions about quirks, bugs and peculiarities in , , , , , , , , and many other websites, are all on-topic here (per my understanding — please correct me if I'm wrong), so, it's unclear what makes you judge archive.today any differently, and why its unavailability with Cloudflare (25 Qs) is somehow offtopic. In fact, as mentioned above, we even already have tag with 24 questions, as early as early as 2010 (due to incoming migrations). How's archive.is any different?!

Looking at https://webapps.stackexchange.com/tags, many of these most popular tags don't even qualify as a pure "webapp", either, if that's the rationale for exclusion — e.g., is never really referred to as a webapp, yet it's all deemed on-topic with 686 questions, and is a top-13 tag.

Likewise, it can also be argued that 1.1.1.1 itself is a webapp as well (this is where we get a bit of an intersection with some other sites on SE network), however, this question is very specific about archive.today, and doesn't go into the whole performance and other unrelated issues around 1.1.1.1 (Hacker News discussion revealed that there are many more than were mentioned), so, it's definitely on the WebApps side.


If anyone disagrees with the question or the answer, they're free to downvote. The number of upvotes greatly exceeds the number of downvotes on both the question and the original atomic answer that came with the question; this is the case even with the alternative answers available, which haven't gotten quite as many upvotes even after being posted around the same time, and I think this proves that the original question and answer pair are neutral enough.

The question received 39k views in less than 48 hours, 63 upvotes, and only 2 votes to close.

Why does the moderator feel a need to intervene with such a popular question that's welcomed by the community?

Clearly if it was actually offtopic, the community would be capable of attaining the 5 close votes that are necessary in order to close the question by itself, and/or downvoting into negative territory, especially given the amount of attention it has received — alas, that's not the case, vast majority of the votes are upvotes, yet the moderator feels a need to censor for no explained reason.

| |
  • Wait, so, the whole thing is now deleted without a trace, without any statements by the mods? WTF is that? – cnst Oct 9 '19 at 0:22
2

This site's scope doesn't encompasses all the possible discussions about web applications, it is focused on using web applications.

i.e. questions about web applications policies are off-topic

Web applications recommendations are off-topic too

Questions about installation/setup/administration of self installed web apps are off-topic

Questions about web site policies are off-topic too

Also, questions about developing web applications are off-topic on this site.

Bye the other hand, if some user isn't able to access a web application due to DNS related matters, that user definitely can't use it. I think that on Super User technical questions about how to set up network settings to access a website are on-topic but it looks that this question wasn't actually a good fit for that site either as at this moment the question is on hold.


While the question mentions a web app, it is not about how to use it, nor a bug or glitch displayed on the web browser or web app user interface, it doesn't include any mention of a search/research effort made as is suggested on How to ask.

It neither mention what web browsers were used, what web app UI elements were used, what web browse developer console messages were found, it just drop some sort of script but doesn't mention if that was used on the referred web application, the web browser developer console tools, the operative console or an installed app. The answers to the question neither are about using the web application through a web browser, they quote company policy statements which are off-topic on this site too.

Another flaw of the question is that it doesn't look be a constructive subjective question.

References

| |
  • The question doesn't fit any of the offtopic categories you propose. Additionally, there are plenty of questions about not being able to use apps due to some quirk or bug within the app. I don't see how archive.is bug/quirk being specific to dns is any different. – cnst Oct 9 '19 at 0:21
  • @cnst The question doesn't fit the on-topic categories either – Rubén Oct 9 '19 at 1:49
1

I can't speak to the moderator's actions, but there's no way that the question is highly regarded by the "community". The usual activity on this site would never see a question get that many votes in that little amount of time. It's obviously getting voted on by people who don't spend all that much time here. I see several pages of new users who've joined in the last three days. Again, rather unusual activity here.

| |
  • So, you're basically complaining that high-reputation users from elsewhere in the StackExchange network have the ability to join WebApps SE in such high numbers? Please bring that up at StackExchange. Noone's forcing anyone to join, that's for sure! The question shouldn't be penalised and tagged offtopic just because you and one other guy disagree with the content, and just because others find the content useful enough to actually spend a few extra seconds to join the site and upvote. – cnst Oct 5 '19 at 22:42
  • 2
    People have long complained about Hot Network Questions causing sudden boosts of attention for a single post when the hordes from Stack Overflow and the other larger sites descend on a smaller site. – ale Oct 8 '19 at 0:59
0

The hold has since been quietly removed, around the same day, and the question got an additional number of upvotes due to being HNQ (Hot Network Question), for a total of 75 on the question itself, 74 on the top (original) answer, 56 on the second answer and 19 on third answer.

A few days later, it was removed in error yesterday, prompting a follow-up (third) meta question here on webapps; it has since been restored once again, earlier today. This should hopefully be the end of the saga around it.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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