Possible Duplicate:
Regarding the high number of rejected migrations from Stack Overflow to Server Fault

Can you please bring back the migrate to Server Fault option off topic reason?

I found this to be helpful in questions like this.


  • why the downvote? Dec 7 '12 at 20:20
  • 6
    Downvotes on meta are... different
    – Oded
    Dec 7 '12 at 20:22
  • 3
    The downvotes may also stem from the fact that you have not given sufficient evidence to support your claim. One question that should be migrated is not evidence that SF should be a migration target. It is also an issue discussed quite a bit in the past several days, so you clearly did not do any (or enough) research before asking the question to see what the reasons were for it being taken off. Your proposal has also not addressed any of those reasons to state why you believe they are wrong, don't apply anymore, or could be fixed without removing SF as a migration target.
    – Servy
    Dec 7 '12 at 21:20
  • 2
    I'm not sure this is a duplicate @animuson. This is a request to revert that feature request, which means that it can't be a duplicate. Dec 7 '12 at 21:22
  • 3
    @Bart: That question explains perfectly well why it was taken off the list, and this question provides no evidence at all why it should be put back. I see no point in this question being open. It would only serve to split the discussion of the same topic on the basis of being the reverse.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Dec 7 '12 at 21:25
  • @animuson Well, considering that there have been at least 3 (and I'm sure more I didn't see) exact duplicates asked in the past week, why close as a question that's most certainly not a duplicate, even if it contains an answer that answers this question?
    – Servy
    Dec 7 '12 at 21:26
  • @Servy: Meta is very different than a normal site. The point of closing is to direct users to the answer, even if the question that produced the answer isn't necessarily an exact duplicate. That question covers this one completely, and if there are other duplicates, they should be closed as well. The removal just occurred recently, so it's obviously not going to change. If someone comes along after more time has passed with evidence that SF should be re-added, then by all means they'll have a valid basis for a new question. This question, however, boils down to "why was it removed?"
    – animuson StaffMod
    Dec 7 '12 at 21:31
  • @animuson That's just it, it doesn't boil down to "why was it removed". It's a feature request stating it should be re-added (it's just a poor one, for all of the reasons stated in my earlier comment).
    – Servy
    Dec 7 '12 at 21:36
  • @Servy: A feature request based upon the lack of knowledge of why it was removed in the first place. That's hardly a feature request, and the answer is simply "no, because of this post linked above."
    – animuson StaffMod
    Dec 7 '12 at 21:38

Server Fault have had problems with really bad questions being migrated from Stack Overflow. They don't want to be a target, as can be seen in their Meta. For example, look at the graph in this answer for a motivation about which type of users "we" are shipping to them as opposed to the users they are targeted at.

I think one problem is that we as SO users may not be entirely into what questions they like/dislike over there. I sure don't because I don't follow SF actively. I do, however, follow SO, including reviewing and closing a lot. I am an example of one who may do bad migrations just because I don't know what quality they expect.

Your example question is perfectly chosen. Look at the comment section:

User did not check their error log

It is one of those questions that is not wanted at SF. Someone not even looking in the error log before asking is arguably not a professional sysadmin (or at least should not be), in the same way as people not even reading error messages are not wanted at SO.

Just close it as off-topic. It is not welcome here, and SF have said that they don't want it there either.


Speaking as someone who does not use Server Fault (I have one migrated answer there, which was upvoted after it was migrated, which I'm very proud of) I spent a fair bit of time trying to stop the utter crap that gets migrated to Server Fault from actually being migrated.

I respect those people and would rather not deluge them with Stack Overflow's refuse. You can always flag for moderator attention if you really feel a need to migrate a question.

The simple fact is that, at the time of writing, in the past 90 days, 956 questions were migrated to Server Fault. Of these 48% were rejected. That means they were closed, deleted or migrated back. That is an astonishingly high percentage and this is after the migration path was removed so it is almost definitely lower than previously.

It may be that the fine people at Server Fault have become more strict but it's more indicative of the sheer amount of rubbish that people on Stack Overflow were pushing that way.

As the percentage of rejections kept increasing the migration option was removed. Unless you can prove that Stack Overflow users can be responsible enough to use the migration options sensibly I see no reason to change them.

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