Currently the migration path options from SO are:
If we are going to be limited to 5 options, shouldn't we periodically re-evaluate which sites are most appropriate?
Migration stats (10k only) indicate that the top sites for the last 90 days are:
- Superuser - 564 - 5% rejected
- ServerFault - 278 - 10% rejected
- Tex - 157 - 13% rejected
- DBA - 144 - 2% rejected
- Sharepoint - 127 - 1% rejected
- Programmers - 126 - 26% rejected
- CodeReview - 100 - 3% rejected
- Meta.SO - 81 - 18% rejected
- Wordpress - 75 - 14% rejected
- Webmasters - 58 - 8% rejected
All these migrations for sites out of the list required a flag and a moderator to process it. This is just extra work for the mod team!
If we had the top 5 destinations by volume as the 5 options, we would have had a net savings of 160 flags to be processed. I suspect we will actually see these numbers change quite a bit if it's easier for users to put questions in the appropriate spot without moderator intervention.
Can we have a review of the migration path list based on migration volume?
Think of the flags!