I believe the best that can be hoped for is a consensus among individuals. It is not clear by any means what the precise scope of this forum is, and even an imprecise scope will change in rough correspondence with community desires.
For this particular question, I suspect it deals with the mathjobs website and its workings, which may be good and useful information to many who read this forum, but in my opinion is more suited to people who visit that website and is not a question for MathOverflow. It is not far in propriety from a question like "in searching Google Scholar for things Erdos wrote, do I need to get the accent in his name right?". Both are good questions, and possibly useful to mathematicians at some point in time, but both deal with interfaces that are likely to change, and in the long term may be of limited usefulness both in temporal and community scope, and I see them as not likely to be of historical interest. Questions on MathOverflow should have some longevity, either because "everybody in the future should know what we know about (twin primes, Poincare conjecture, odd perfect number status, what have you) today", or because "somebody in the future will want to know in general terms what we know today about (doing mathematics, promoting mathematics, talking about mathematics, fill in the mathematical blank)".
If the question were instead " I have this mathjobs issue (ISSUE) and the current resources don't help: where are resources that do?", that would be more like a reference request and a general answer to it might have some longevity. I could see a question of that type on this forum now and for the foreseeable future. At present, I agree with the commenter that the mathjobs-and-reference-letters question is better for the academia forum than this one.
Gerhard "Forming Forums For Foreseeable Futures" Paseman, 2016.10.30.