The [FAQ][1] discourages tool recommendations - it specifically says that this site is _not_ for tool recommendations.  Tool recommendations tend to be localized (localized  in time - because one version of a tool may be very different from another. Localized in applicability because if the requirements aren't well expressed, then the "best" tool for you may be merely average for most people.) Tool recommendations are difficult to generalize for everyone - every requirements set is very specific.  

The counter argument is [questions][2] that are reasonably specific and well formulated.  *please feel free to insert other examples; I know there are many*  We get a _lot_ of questions about tool recommendations.  I've been perhaps overly enthusiastic about discouraging tool recommendations.


[Area 51][3] says we need to raise the number of questions asked here/day in order to graduate from beta.  I admit that I'm concerned about the discouraging effect every time I vote or comment to close a question.  I believe that that part of the value of a site is consistent culture, and one of the fair ways to ensure that is to make the FAQ correspond to the behavior.  But I'm concerned that we're (I'm) discouraging potentially enthusiastic participants. 

It appears this isn't the first time we've contemplated this [question][4] before.

Rather than continue my quixotic crusade to follow the FAQ, I thought I'd ask the meta question - which do we want? The PM:SE described by the FAQ, or the PM:SE that we're getting? How much effort should we devote to preserving the PM:SE we want?  Is there a way of bounding tool recommendations that conforms to the SE: model of voting for the best answer to a generalized question?


  [1]: http://pm.stackexchange.com/faq
  [2]: http://pm.stackexchange.com/q/8044/4367
  [3]: http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/10947/project-management
  [4]: http://meta.pm.stackexchange.com/q/351/4367