0

This seems inconsistent. I would think the current site should be included (perhaps greyed out) or the menu item changed to be "other sites".

  • Screen real-estate and bandwidth is saved by eliminating redundant or unneeded information. Presumably the user knows that the current site exists by virtue of having visited it. What benefit would be gained by adding it? – George Cummins Aug 9 '13 at 17:34
  • Showing it only to gray it out seems awkward. And I don't see what it's inconsistent with. – j08691 Aug 9 '13 at 17:35
  • @GeorgeCummins - Well, to give just one use case, when I failed to see the Programmers SE site as a choice for an alternate SE site when flagging a SO question, I went to the Programmer site and saw that it had a different UI, had a different StackExchange pop-up look and then saw that Programmers wasn't listed under its "all sites". I thought that the whole site had been deprecated. The benefit would be consistency with the terminology "all" and getting a true "all" view, although I'd be fine with changing "all sites" to "other sites" in the menu item. – Peter Alfvin Aug 9 '13 at 17:45
  • @j08691 - Having a site missing from the list is inconsistent with the term "all", but would be perfectly consistent with the term "other". – Peter Alfvin Aug 9 '13 at 17:47
2

I like to visit all "my sites" in turn. I go in rep order and the absence of the current site in the list makes it harder to remember my place. Given a choice, I would choose to show the current site. All the more if my current feature request on showing rep change in the all sites list was implemented.

You must log in to answer this question.

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