Timeline for Migrations should not be rejected while question is "on hold"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2014 at 19:08 | comment | added | Raphael | I did not know we could fix the issue by clearing migration history; now that's an answer to the problem, thanks! (However, if it's a mod-only feature it does not scale well. For the volume I have encountered, it's a good solution nevertheless.) | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 19:07 | comment | added | Raphael | The rules buy us usability. Reposting is of course possible, but why not use the tools we have? Note that following my proposal the target site can still reject crap migrations (just with a time delay). | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:56 | comment | added | user102937 | BTW, Stack Overflow and Programmers both treat homework dumps and code dumps in exactly the same fashion as Computer Science does. | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:51 | comment | added | user102937 | So what do your proposed new rules buy us? Can't the OP just repost? I am resisting this because I see it as "Oh, the target site will just deal with any quality problems the question may have," and I'm not generally in favor of that, for reasons that I've already explained. What prevents you as a mod from simply clearing the migration history on the target site to unlock the post? | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:48 | comment | added | Raphael | "and question quality standards really shouldn't differ all that much from site to site" -- well, they do. As long as you assume they did not we won't be able to agree. (For instance, on Computer Science we close perfectly clear and ontopic questions if they don't show effort (e.g. homework dumps). Users on other sites don't know that and maybe can't even tell the difference.) | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:35 | comment | added | user102937 | That's exactly the point I'm trying to convey. Because users who migrate questions can't be expected to understand all of the variations in question quality norms on all the target sites, they should simply close low-quality questions, not migrate them only to have them closed on the target site. Remember, the OP can always repost their question to the correct site. Botched migrations are far more disruptive than simply having the OP repost, and question quality standards really shouldn't differ all that much from site to site. | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:31 | comment | added | Raphael | Thanks for explaining how things should work, but you did not address my points. Restating my comment on the question: policies differ. A question that may be offtopic but look okay on, say, Software Engineering or Mathematics may still be put on hold on Computer Science. We can't expect people to know/understand policy on other sites, so they should migrate from their PoV. Furthermore, assuming migration was a mistake (how can it be if the user was happy to improve their question?), why punish a) the asking user and b) the target site for something people on the migrating site skrewed up? | |
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:26 | history | edited | user102937 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 191 characters in body
|
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:20 | history | edited | user102937 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 191 characters in body
|
| Feb 2, 2014 at 18:11 | history | answered | user102937 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |