« first day (2725 days earlier)      last day (37 days later) » 

[ Natty | Sentinel ] Link to Post Low Length; No Code Block; Low Rep; Unregistered User; 1.5;
 
[ Natty | Sentinel ] Link to Post Low Length; No Code Block; Low Rep; 1.0;
 
 
2 hours later…
5:43 AM
OT no-repro, OP hasn't visited this site for 3 years.
OT no-repro, abandoned question
 
6:00 AM
 
6:13 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url-only title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, +8 more (698): fitnessproductcenter.com/envy-us/ by eimhounsl on askubuntu.com
 
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of body, potentially bad ns for domain in body (100): boot steering rack manufacturers by sf50259 on askubuntu.com
 
also kinda off-topic
 
7:16 AM
OT Java NullPointerException This question belongs at Stack Overflow.
 
7:51 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of body, pattern-matching website in body (196): Masters In Abroad by basha on askubuntu.com
 
 
3 hours later…
10:32 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of answer (60): Highlight words in Document Viewer by gaurav on askubuntu.com
 
 
2 hours later…
2:30 PM
@pomsky I agree with the duplication. It's not off-topic, though: they're using Ubuntu and asking why the Ubuntu system they're using does a specific thing differently from a CentOS system they've used.
@Natty tp
@Natty tp
@Natty tp
 
@Natty tp
 
(unrelated) Was color of Edit button in front of comment changed to blue?
 
3:12 PM
@EliahKagan Ah, yes. I missed the "as" in the title (I read as "why [...] command <something> not works on CentOS 7").
Anyway, I voted as dupe too.
 
3:35 PM
@pomsky Yeah, I had to read it twice myself. If it were still open, I'd add the Ubuntu version information to the body above the description of the behavior the OP got in Ubuntu. As it stands, I don't want to do that -- at least not yet -- because it may turn out that the OP changes their mind about the dupe target fully answering their question, and if so, I'd like their edit to put it in the reopen queue.
(This is just my preference; to my knowledge, we have no consensus for or against the sort of edit I am presently avoiding.)
 
4:09 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad keyword in body, repeated url at end of long post (201): What Is Technical Fact In Plug N Pure? by plugnpure1 on askubuntu.com
 
@Natty tp
@Natty tp
@Kulfy Yes.
 
5:02 PM
I don't think that this question as a dupe target is helpful in this case
@EliahKagan I observed many other fonts are now blue instead of regular orange. For example the ones in "Hot meta posts".
 
@Kulfy I think it's comparably relevant to the other target. But I've just switched the order in which they're listed.
@Kulfy Yes. The border of a comment box, and the help link shown next to it, are also now blue.
 
@EliahKagan I'm not sure how the question (now listed as second) is relevant. In target question there was no output when ls was used.
 
5:26 PM
unclear, not off-topic
 
But it would still be closed as OT.
 
@Kulfy I think the considerations that apply to unexpectedly empty ls output also apply to the broader encompassing case of ls output that shows some entries but not those that are expected. It may be that -a should be passed, and it may be that the OP is mistakenly in the wrong directory; both are covered in the answer there. The other target asks what . and .. mean, which I think is even more different from from the OP is asking, though obviously is also relevant to it.
 
It's more about a option I guess.
 
@Kulfy It was. I guess a third OT vote came in after my unclear vote. I guess it's best to leave it closed rather than reopening it to reclose it. I replaced my comment accordingly, with a version that mentions explicitly that I think the question is unclear rather than off-topic.
 
Makes sense.
 
5:36 PM
@Kulfy Maybe we have some question (or questions) that should be added as a third (or more) dupe target?
 
I'm not aware of any question specific to a option. Do you think it's worth reopening?
 
Maybe. But I thought we did have one.
 
6:37 PM
What happened here? The post was on-topic. Were there comments? Why did the OP vandalize and delete the post?
(I'm not advocating undeleting it unless there's strong reason to think the OP deleted it based on incorrect information, especially considering the self-vandalism. But I am wondering what happened...)
I think all but the first two comments on this question are no longer needed. As for whether or not the question is on-topic. I'm not sure. Starting with a KDE Neon system and getting to Ubuntu doesn't seem fundamentally different from starting with any other system and getting to Ubuntu.
@EliahKagan On the other hand, the question is asking specifically about a procedure that would be done in KDE Neon to transform that system into Ubuntu, and the OP appears to intend that the question be interpreted in such a way as to exclude answers about any other approach.
(unrelated) not off-topic
still OT Pop!_OS (the edit put it in the queue)
dupe, maybe unclear
no longer unclear - but is it a duplicate of something?
not off-topic, I think - the tag may have been unintentional, I'm not sure
(Newcomers often mistag things based on something like the colloquial meaning of a tag that refers to a specific project. In this case, I suspect the OP considered to apply to thinks that are fundamental and essential parts of the system, like the kernel.)
 
@Natty tp
unclear (not off-topic)
not too broad - as the answers show, it's compactly answerable
unclear, maybe off-topic
 
Not a dupe. I don't agree with Thomas unless I'm missing something.
 
7:43 PM
@EliahKagan Maybe this?
 
8:04 PM
@Kulfy I've reopened the question and commented to say specifically why I do not believe it is a duplicate.
@Kulfy Looks good, VTC'd.
 
@Natty tp
 
8:23 PM
@EliahKagan Thanks :)
 
Although somewhat unsatisfying, this self-answer does give a solution.
 
10:29 PM
 
[ Natty | Sentinel ] Link to Post Contains Blacklisted Word - help me; Low Length; No Code Block; IntelliBL - 0.4; Low Rep; 3.0;
 

« first day (2725 days earlier)      last day (37 days later) »