What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

Just like StackOverflow, ServerFault, and SuperUser are all closely related, other StackExchange sites should be able to set up sites in the network as "friend" sites.

The friend relationship could be used for things like the "belongs on X" close reasons, and perhaps sometimes share a common "meta" area as do the original S[OFU] sites. I'm sure there are other good uses for such a feature as well.

share|improve this question
2  
I would rather unfriend Stack Overflow :-P –  Ivo Flipse Jun 21 '10 at 16:37
1  
+1 - particularly if the web apps one can "friend" Super User. –  ChrisF Jun 21 '10 at 16:37
2  
I like it for migration (Gaming/GameDev, looking at you two!), but the shared meta I'm not so keen about. For example, if something friends one of the trilogy, then does its meta get absorbed into this one? Or would we end up with, say, Super User meta-questions on two separate Meta sites? This would happen with any situation where you might like the link to only go halfway. –  Grace Note Jun 21 '10 at 16:42
1  
@ccomet - my thoughts are that there should be a separate meta for each site during the beta period and perhaps for the first few weeks, then it ought to be merged with The One True Meta. Once the initial tweaks to reputation thresholds, site boundaries etc. are over most of the questions are going to apply to all sites - except for the specific question ones and there are so few of those it won't hurt having extra ones here. –  ChrisF Jun 21 '10 at 17:02
    
@ChrisF ...so why did SU and SF get their own metas? :) IIRC, Gaming, for one, is developing a set of policies that is partially incompatible with other sites' (mainly because subjective questions are more of a problem there). Example –  badp Sep 26 '10 at 9:03
    
@radp - See this blog post for more information on the more site metas blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/new-per-site-metas. My comment about the site specific metas being folded into Meta is now redundant. I think that the per site metas are needed for exactly the reason you mention - each site is going to have a slightly different take on what's allowed and what isn't. –  ChrisF Sep 26 '10 at 13:19
    
@Chris -- sorry then, I must have misread what you wrote :) –  badp Sep 26 '10 at 14:33
    
Marked completed because there are now migration paths between different sites. –  Joel Coehoorn Oct 26 '10 at 13:52
    
@Joel I think the question was asking about more than just the migration capabilities, so maybe the completed status isn't completely justified. I discuss some more advantages of this here: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94066/… :D –  Gordon Gustafson Jun 7 '11 at 1:24

1 Answer 1

I think this is only appropriate for having a sanely sized footer (as opposed to four lines of links to other SE sites), because:

  • It should be possible to migrate questions from all (golden) sites to all (golden) sites.
    For example, SO probably wouldn't friend partner with Gaming, but what do you do when get a question about Corewar on StackOverflow?
  • Each site has different policies, different tags and different problems, so you can't just "merge" metas together.
share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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