The most frequent off-topic site that I choose is DBA, but probably second most common is programmers. For me, the distinction between SO and programmers is clear, but I can understand why so many SO questions are off-topic and belong on programmers - which is all the more reason to add it to the quick-pick list of "other" sites.

Adding programmers to the "other sites" list would:

  • advertise its existence (lack of awareness that programmers exists is probably why questions hit SO)
  • make its purpose better understood (the short description would be read more often)
  • get selected enough times (for the right reasons) to warrant its inclusion
  • save me having to go via "flag", then "other" and type in "please migrate to programmers"

And why are there only 5 sites?
If superuser is a choice, surely programmers should be too - they're about equidistant from SO IMHO

And why is TeX there? I rarely see questions about LaTex etc.

  • 1
    Related: Update Migration Path List for Non-Moderators. As you can see, Prgrammers.SE was there and removed due to the very high percentage of rejected migrations. Jul 24, 2013 at 15:05
  • Well, I don't feel it's a duplicate. I'm talking about programmers specifically, and I wanted to voice my opinion that it should be on the list, especially given the closeness of it to SO. I'm not asking for "12 options", I'm asking for one more and with good reason IHMO.
    – Bohemian
    Jul 24, 2013 at 15:08
  • 2
    Programmers was explicitly removed from the list, changes that it'll be added again are slim. Jul 24, 2013 at 15:09
  • @psubsee2003 Maybe that was the fault of the site description in the list, not its existence in the list, that led to large percentage of bad flags
    – Bohemian
    Jul 24, 2013 at 15:09
  • 2
    Programmers used to be a migration path. Until it was clear that it ended up being the dumping ground for anything that appeared "off-topic" on Stack Overflow. It is in fact more narrowly defined than Stack Overflow and most those that would vote to migrate do no appreciate that. Re-adding it would only cause more confusion and back-and-forth.
    – Oded
    Jul 24, 2013 at 15:10
  • 1
    @Bohemian See my recent answer on the dup that was sparked by a similar post earlier today. The short version is the community as a whole sucks as migrating because often the migration votes come from people not familiar enough with the target site, so other sites end up having to clean up the mess that SO sends them. Jul 24, 2013 at 15:12
  • 2
    @psubsee2003 - Actually I think that there's a lot to be said for only allowing people to vote to migrate to sites where they have sufficient reputation, rather than migrate from sites where they have sufficient reputation.
    – Mark Booth
    Jul 24, 2013 at 16:25
  • 1
    @MarkBooth that very well might be a solution. Maybe a review queue on the destination site that handles the migration. A question that is voted to be migrated on the original site is closed as off topic and it goes into the review queue on the target site. If enough users on the target site vote to accept it, it is moved. If not, it stays closed. Jul 24, 2013 at 16:30
  • @MarkBooth see above ^^ Jul 25, 2013 at 9:35
  • Thanks @CodyGray, I missed that before. Things have changed a lot in the two years since that request was declined, especially the number of sites and the number of people with significant rep on multiple sites (even I have 500+ rep on 11 sites *8'), so it might be worth revisiting.
    – Mark Booth
    Jul 25, 2013 at 9:45


Browse other questions tagged .