Meanwhile, your $HOME's dotfiles want a word about cleanliness...

And your /usr/bin wants to argue with /usr/local/bin and both of those cringe when they see /bin.

No, mentioning and sticking to standards is a good thing and I think is very on-topic.

The good thing about standards is that there are so many of them to chose from.

Besides, if a man wants to have /storage on his owned machine, who are we to tell him otherwise?

> if a man wants to have /storage on his owned machine, who are we to tell him otherwise?

Nothing wrong with a man putting /storage on his owned machine.

But if I were using my own machine and I put /storage there (actually, I used /opt/<site>), it would be because I didn't know there was a standard place for things. Then someone told me about /srv and its purpose. So now I use /srv even on my own machine so that I'm familiar with /srv in a professional environment.

I'm all for filesystem standards but "serving" is such an ephemeral concept that I don't think it makes sense to mandate that "files" that are "served" must be mounted under /srv. That's just being excessively pedantic.

Yup, and while I'm not likely to ever again build a Linux fileserver, TIL.