There are many cases where a user posts a question on site A that either isn't on-topic or seems to be better suited to, say, Site B. Quite often, there is a comment posted that runs along these lines:
Might this be better for Site B?
This can be helpful - it's brought attention to some sites that might not come into the asker's mind at the time - but it can also be unhelpful, especially if the person posting the comment isn't active on Site B. In that case, things can go horribly wrong.
User 1: Might this be better for Site B?
Asker: Perhaps; I'll try posting it there.
[Generic comment from someone about not cross-posting.]
User 2: No, this isn't a good idea? These kinds of questions aren't good for Site B because [yada yada yada]. (Optional: A recommendation for Site C.)
To be continued. . . in more comments.
This can be extremely unhelpful for the Asker, because now s/he doesn't know where to put the question! There might be a mini-discussion in the comments about the whole thing, but more often then not, when a dispute like this comes up, things can be . . . confusing.
I have seen scenarios where the same question ends up on three separate sites - none of which it is appropriate for! All thanks to some bad site recommendations.
Don't get me wrong - these comments can be helpful. I'm not saying that they should be axed. Quite the opposite. But users need to substantiate their recommendations, rather than simply saying, "This might be good on Site B."
Is there any etiquette involved in recommending a site (i.e. what should go into a helpful comment)? If not, should there be, and what should it be like? Or, as a third option, is this issue really not too important?