Timeline for A proposed philosophy of question migration
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:56 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com/ with https://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:59 | comment | added | peterh | I think the problem that there is not enough reviewer and thus mods have to intervent to accelerate the review process, even in non-exceptional cases, is quite unfortunate. I don't know what could be done with it. I think the SE, ignoring this problem, says essentially: make your site bigger and the problem will solve itself, and, starting a migration cooperation with other mods of small sites, could lead to this direction. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:47 | comment | added | peterh | If you don't have problems in this case, it means that you are doing your intra-mod cooperation tasks well, and you are good to avoid or prevent conflicts. But, to do that, you have to close questions which could get a much better treatment as a fast closure on sites with a similar topic. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:47 | comment | added | goldilocks | "Also I know that small sites tend to be much more friendly" -> I like to think of it this way, and while I think it may be contentious, I see us and the crossover we have with larger sites as providing the opportunity to give people a gentle introduction to the larger S.E. family, which is why I'm happy to provide links but hesitant to, as I semi-joke above, throw people to the lions on, e.g., S.O. "I see a site being more and more hostile as it grows" -> Could be; it is probably easier to be tight knit but friendly when there are only a dozen or so questions a day to deal with. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:40 | comment | added | peterh | Also I know that small sites tend to be much more friendly, particularly with new accounts, as the large ones. Thus, my bitter feelings about this matter are mainly not on your deeds, although I feel often quite sad as I see a site being more and more hostile as it grows. I think, the mods of small sites could cooperate more closely, they could learn eachothers scope enough well to make a "migration alliance", which would result the advertising and to the growth of your site, while you wouldn't have to hesitate about a quick intervention in the case of a good, but offtopic question. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:39 | comment | added | goldilocks | @peterh "migration issues lead many times to territorial conflicts between the sites and the mods." -> I believe this is sometimes true but in almost two years I've never had any memorable problems with other mods, so I have no idea how serious an issue it is generally. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:34 | comment | added | goldilocks | A serious issue for me, as a mod on one of the smaller sites, is that if I wait to leave certain blatantly off-topic or low quality questions to be closed by 5 user votes, this can easily take a week because we simply do not have sufficient users with sufficient reputation to get the job done because of the "one size fits all" policy applied to all sites.This is just a waste of everyone's time and again plays into creating the impression of pointless bureaucracy. It is an important part of my role, and the purpose of the hammer, to deal with those quickly and efficiently for everyone's good. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:34 | comment | added | peterh | I am sorry if you think I gave things into your mouth, but alhough I am not a mod, I am thinking, asking and investigating since years in this matter and thus I know, for example, that migration issues lead many times to territorial conflicts between the sites and the mods. I also know very well that a mods important goal is to avoid any conflict cases; this is perfectly understable in their (your) role, but unfortunately it leads to the closure (and later, deletion) of many good content, although they could have got a fair treatment on alternative SE sites. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:30 | comment | added | peterh | If you at least provide a link, I think it is better, but in my opinion, there is no real reason against an easy and automatic migration system handled simply by user-level votes. I don't think that migrations should be rare or exceptional; instead I think the communities of the source side should decide about the offer (because it is an offer, and not a request), and the voters of the target side should decide about they accept it. I think it is so clear and simple as the Sun, and that not this is the normal way since years, it is only an irrational taboo. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:26 | comment | added | goldilocks | One network policy change I do think would mitigate against this problem is if the receiving site had the option of bouncing a migration because the question is considered off-topic, but also as closing for unrelated reasons and keeping the question as if it had been posted there. Now this is not the case. I receive a certain amount of migrated crap that I cannot, to be fair to the standards imposed on everyone else leave open. This bounces the migration not because it is off-topic but for other reasons, which I think creates the impression of pointless bureaucracy described in the answer. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:26 | comment | added | goldilocks | lazy to cut n' paste BTW, I do not think that is a valid excuse for "helping" them by migrating). ...It might help if I clarified the above policy to mean that I treat "unclear", "too broad", etc. as priorities and I think they should be, i.e., bluntly don't migrate crap in the name of being useful, because it isn't. | |
| Oct 9, 2016 at 15:25 | comment | added | goldilocks | @peterh You've put a lot of words into my mouth, I'll presume inadvertently because of some wider dialogue. First, I do migrate and that's clear. Nowhere do I say anything like my reason not to is that I "want to avoid conflicts with the other sites and mods" -- I could care less, TBH. My concern is everything to do with helping new users find other sites, because when a migrated question is closed at the other side, it gets bounced, which I think is confusing and unhelpful, hence I would prefer to close locally instead and provide a link to the other site (if someone is too | |
| Oct 8, 2016 at 18:29 | comment | added | peterh | Your own policy, as a mod, that you don't migrate, only close. Your reason is that you want to avoid conflicts with the other sites and mods. For that, rather you expel new users of the SE network, instead helping them to find the better sites if they've started on a false one. The system of the SE currently encourages your this behavior, but don't forget: so it is not okay. Don't support a bad system, if it could be fixed. Unfortunately, @JonEricsson's proposal further worsens it, but maybe it won't be forever so. | |
| Oct 7, 2016 at 22:21 | history | answered | goldilocks | CC BY-SA 3.0 |