Keeping the possibility for migrations open is important, and I agree that this is a good motive:

Migrate questions when it saves the asker the effort to reask.

As long as it is mitigated by a serious concern concern with this:

Please don't "horse trade" questions. Don't migrate crap and remember that destination sites can reject migrated questions by closing them.

Experienced users are more likely to be familiar with criteria common to the network in general ("too broad", "unclear", "opinion based", etc.) than new users, and they are also far more likely to be aware that they have choices about where to post. This implies migratable questions tend to come from new, inexperienced users. In that context migrating relatively innocent questions that are destined for rejection because of other criteria is one way to split the difference between:

• "Okay, they have rules, standards, best practices -- fine and fair!" and

• "This is a just an absurd, out-of-control bureaucracy..." with a literal pass the buck button.

My own policy, as a moderator, is (for the most part) to be a little extra stringent about quality related criteria with migrated questions¹, and if they do not pass, instead close them as too broad/unclear/etc., then take a minute to explain the issue more specifically if necessary and include a link to a site I think is more appropriate.

Because of that attitude while we (Rasberry Pi) have a lot of crossover with larger sites including S.O., I rarely actually migrate but I very regularly close as just described, using cookie cutter comments ala "more appropriate to our parent/big sibling ________".

I think this benefits cases where the question is from new/naive users because it avoids the appearance of a bureaucratic swamp, and gives them something concrete to chew on. On very rare occasions someone will say, "Couldn't you just move this?" in which case either I do, or, more likely, I don't, and explain a little further why I feel this question needs more work put into it first.

Not migrating under those circumstances provides people the opportunity to think about this, if they have been given some hint in the right direction. They can still always just open another account and cut n' paste, but in that case the question has at least not really gotten any worse, and if it does not pass muster elsewhere, instead of having the migration rejected, the otherwise passed back and forth buck is (hopefully) firmly stopped with an unequivocal "You need to think about and work on your question".

^{1. Although I admit as a human being to occasionally throwing people to the lions because hey, isn't that what the lions are for?}

Keeping the possibility for migrations open is important, and I agree that this is a good motive:

Migrate questions when it saves the asker the effort to reask.

As long as it is mitigated by a serious concern concern with this:

Please don't "horse trade" questions. Don't migrate crap and remember that destination sites can reject migrated questions by closing them.

Experienced users are more likely to be familiar with criteria common to the network in general ("too broad", "unclear", "opinion based", etc.) than new users, and they are also far more likely to be aware that they have choices about where to post. This implies migratable questions tend to come from new, inexperienced users. In that context migrating relatively innocent questions that are destined for rejection because of other criteria is one way to split the difference between:

• "Okay, they have rules, standards, best practices -- fine and fair!" and

• "This is a just an absurd, out-of-control bureaucracy..." with a literal pass the buck button.

My own policy, as a moderator, is (for the most part) to be a little extra stringent about quality related criteria with migrated questions¹, and if they do not pass, instead close them as too broad/unclear/etc., then take a minute to explain the issue more specifically if necessary and include a link to a site I think is more appropriate.

Because of that attitude while we (Rasberry Pi) have a lot of crossover with larger sites including S.O., I rarely actually migrate but I very regularly close as just described, using cookie cutter comments ala "more appropriate to our parent/big sibling ________".

I think this benefits cases where the question is from new/naive users because it avoids the appearance of a bureaucratic swamp, and gives them something concrete to chew on. On very rare occasions someone will say, "Couldn't you just move this?" in which case either I do, or, more likely, I don't, and explain a little further why I feel this question needs more work put into it first.

Not migrating under those circumstances provides people the opportunity to think about this, if they have been given some hint in the right direction. They can still always just open another account and cut n' paste, but in that case the question has at least not really gotten any worse, and if it does not pass muster elsewhere, instead of having the migration rejected, the otherwise passed back and forth buck is (hopefully) firmly stopped with an unequivocal "You need to think about and work on your question".

^{1. Although I admit as a human being to occasionally throwing people to the lions because hey, isn't that what the lions are for?}