Look, I know this question may have been asked before, but not by me and not in my context and experiences. I just noticed this question over at Server Fault and would like to ask who it is that is responsible for the moving of questions on this site? After all this is a community so surely it should not be in the sole hands of the moderators (if it is).

I myself have been annoyed especially over the last week where I had a question closed on Stack Overflow and Super User. It fell into both sites' scopes and was shut on the one and then the other. It would have been a far better option in my opinion to just move it to the correct site and for the moderator to give a clear explanation on reasons for closing it.

The best example I have of a question being closed aggressively was last year here on SO. I asked a question regarding MySQL server issues where the server would shut down with any erroneous MySQL command from IntelliJ, command line, but not WorkBench. This question was moved as off-topic to SO to Server Fault. Yet I would like to know how a MySQL server question even becomes a question for the context of Server Fault if the developer can not even resolve his issue before it even becomes a question relevant for Server Fault? The latter of these sites is for production environments and my original question was relevant to SO and programmers as this was my context.Further, I resolved my issue and I could have posted an answer, but it was since closed.

I feel that questions in this community should be closed when they clearly are out of context (like a Christianity question in SO), but a MySQL question anywhere on the number of programming sites here should never be closed as off topic when it deals with the topic, but should be migrated.

My suggestion is for users like me who may post a question that they feel may be slightly out of scope to have an option (maybe a flag) to suggest that this question should possibly be moved before being closed.

share|improve this question
2  
Do you realize that most closes are accomplished by ordinary users who have at least 3000 rep? And that every close gets you a list of who did it (it might be worth looking to see if they wrote a comment)? And comes with an automatic explanation of the highest voted close reason among the closers? Is there a particular part that you would like more detail on? –  dmckee Nov 12 '12 at 21:03
2  
And that users (even lower rep users) can flag a question for moderator attention, and suggest it be moved, making their case in the other text box. –  jschoen Nov 12 '12 at 21:06
    
Ultimately who moves questions and surely if there is a close question option, there should be a "move" option. –  thejartender Nov 12 '12 at 21:17
5  
@thejartender - There is. Those who can vote to close something as being off topic can vote to migrate it to one of five destinations, with Server Fault as one of them: meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/134636/… –  Brad Larson Nov 12 '12 at 21:24
    
You are always free to inquire why a particular questions of yours has been closed on the appropriate Meta, should the closure message not already provide somewhat of a hint. –  Bart Nov 12 '12 at 21:33
1  
Are you talking about these two questions: superuser.com/questions/499999/… and stackoverflow.com/questions/13234577/… (and then this question: stackoverflow.com/questions/9428476/…) ? –  NullUserException อ_อ Nov 12 '12 at 21:37
    
But migration requires a super-majority of close voters (4 votes, all for the same destination) because there was a significant problem with bad migrations for a while. –  dmckee Nov 12 '12 at 21:39
10  
PS: It sucks that you have a brain tumor, but people vote on questions based on their merit alone. If it's a bad question, it will be downvoted. We can't take mitigating factors in consideration. It's a slippery slope. –  NullUserException อ_อ Nov 12 '12 at 21:44
    
@dmckee bandwagon effect in close votes is a known issue in current review system: "people are agreeing with existing close votes without thoroughly evaluating whether they're accurate" –  gnat Nov 13 '12 at 9:27
add comment

closed as not constructive by Rosinante, jonsca, Toon Krijthe, Martijn Pieters, Andrew's a Unitato Nov 13 '12 at 12:42

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Brainless mob-migrations to inappropriate site are a problem complained about by Server Fault guys.

As an active reviewer in Close votes queue I obtain bandwagon effect in close votes quite frequently. It is especially sad to see clueless migration suggestions piling on questions about development tools (IDEs, simulators, dev environment).

But even when I try to do it responsibly, the system doesn't feel exactly right to me. Uncertainty about whether the question is indeed appropriate at site I voted to migrate to makes me feel bad.

As a close voter, I would very

very

very

very much appreciate

if questions I voted to migrate would have a chance to be reviewed at target site prior to migration. It would feel much safer knowing that slippery / incorrect migration suggestions can be blocked.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .