If a user wants to flag a question as off-topic and belonging on another site, they most likely follow the path illustrated here to do so. If the site they had in mind is not in the suggested list (and I agree that often it should not be), they must return to the base menu and select "other" to properly flag the question.

This workflow is not intuitive, and likely leads to many questions being unflagged when they need moderator attention, and thus the questions go unanswered and pollute the quality of the question pool for the site.

I propose that we add an "other" option to the following dialog. This keeps in line with the concerns raised in this question, while providing an intuitive way to flag such questions.

enter image description here

  • 2
    Consider that for migration by users we require a consensus of 4 to migrate to the same site. When you make that a choice of ~40 rather than 3-5, the chances of that consensus to be reaches falls dramatically.
    – Oded
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 18:19
  • @Oded - As opposed to the current situation: the site the question belongs on isn't specifiable, and the chance of consensus is zero. Regardless, the site can be specified in the "other" field from the initial flag dialog anyway - so if the user doesn't want to select one of the given sites then they will specify their own there. I don't see how providing that same option on this page would reduce the consensus any further than it already is.
    – Cory Klein
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 18:23
  • @CoryKlein - The difference with "other" is that mods from both sites come to an agreement. Many times these get rejected by the migration target.
    – Oded
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 18:27
  • Additionally, it makes little sense to include all Stack Exchange sites as migration paths (say Cooking or Christianity as migrations from Stack Overflow).
    – Oded
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 18:29
  • @Oded - Could you explain that a bit better? Is there any reason that mods from both sites couldn't come to agreement with the proposed method? I agree it doesn't make sense to include all sites as migration paths - but there are definitely more migration paths from SO than are/can be represented in the dialog above. Would you reject this proposal for fear that somebody could flag a question for migration to Christianity?
    – Cory Klein
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 18:36
  • 1
    The moderators do ask each other about migration candidates. Many times a question that users believe fits another site, doesn't (for various reasons). When I said "Many times these get rejected by the migration target" I meant - the mods talked and the idea of migration got rejected.
    – Oded
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 18:41
  • @Oded We ask moderators not to spend too much time consulting other sites about whether or not a question is suitable there. This is what automatic migration rejections are for. The amount of question-trading that sometimes goes on in mod-only chat rooms is somewhat unfortunate and we encourage folks to curb the urge to do it every single time.
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 22:50
  • Hmm. Off-hand, I kind of like this. Gonna have to think about possible implications, but if this was just translated into a custom "other" flag for moderators to review, it sounds like a possible improvement for the UI for everyone else. (Note that I wouldn't consider implementing this for close votes, just flags.)
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 22:52

1 Answer 1


This really should have happened years ago.

I don't review that much, but when I do, most of my "belongs on another site" votes don't fit the set of options the dialog suggests. So I end up writing a custom comment. Why can't I choose an arbitrary site?

I have no opinion on the specific UI, wouldn't mind a drop-down list, a search dialog when you enter part of the name, etc.

You must log in to answer this question.

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