judging online information quality based on site where it appeared: a comprehensive guide

- "How To (...)" in the title, cookie banners, lots of side-information written in a way that wastes your time: SEO slop, don't bother. You might as well make a wild guess, same likelyhood it'll be correct

- official docs for $x, autogenerated by a rube-goldberg machine and automagically pushed into whatever-pages by a fully-skidoodled, post-quantum CI pipeline: describes everything, except the exact fact you're looking for.

- no HTTPS, tilde in the name, DNS with 4+ dots, likely hosted on some dusty uni server, white background with absolutely no CSS: one of the best resources on the subject. you question how it's even still online

- site titled "Garry's blog", default wordpress favicon, last update either previous month or 12 years ago: golden. crystal-clear exposition, good examples and screenshots framed so well you don't even need arrows pointing places. likely used as a cheat-sheet daily by everyone in the community
@[email protected] I'll add: Support forum thread from 8 years ago. Describes your problem perfectly and spells out why several potential solutions don't actually work. Stops short of actually solving the problem.

Belatedly, you realise you were the original poster.
@kim @domi OFFICIAL support forum. 😆 😭
@kim I've had a variant of that at work. I searched for an error and found a a thread on it, but it didn't contain a resolution. I raised it with our dev team, including the link to what I found. A dev replies and admitted he was the OP of the tread.