-18

Unfortunately, the data SE doesn't have any meta site.

It could be a very useful feature, people could share their tips and experiences about the site.

Improve this question
6
  • 2
    I think meta.SE is good enough for now, no?
    – Mithical
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 18:51
  • 1
    @Mithrandir In theory, yes. In practive, I never met any longer or interesting discussion about the data SE, which would surely happen on a site dedicated to it.
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:07
  • 1
    @Servy ...why? After the move, which just happened, Meta sites are site.meta, which would probably apply to SEDE if it got it's own.
    – Mithical
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:41
  • @Mithrandir Currently, there is no meta.data.stackexchange.com, thus there is nothing to simply move there.
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:50
  • 3
    I know; I wanted to know why @Servy rolled back my edit that switched the proposed meta site from meta.data to data.meta to match other per-site metas.
    – Mithical
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:57
  • @Mithrandir I don't know, I see the meta moves unimportant from this question, but an important won battle in the long-standing war of the SE with the https support, thus I am happy on it. Anyways the question is, if we would want to have a community around data SE, analyzing it and playing on it.
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 20, 2017 at 4:50

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
14

I don't think this is necessary, but we'd likely block it for technical reasons, since it would be a new variant of a child meta breaking over a thousand assumptions about parents in our code.

The only such special casing in place now is https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/, which is already a massive pain and tech debt factor. In fact, it's causing pain with the HTTPS move right now, since I can't move it the same way as everything else.

Improve this answer
3
  • Maybe the meta site adaption to different parents could have a separated place in the code base? I suggest a solution where the meta sites are essentially main sites + extended with some synchronisation methods.
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:09
  • 5
    @peterh You do know it's not actually that simple of a change to make, right?
    – user206222
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:11
  • @Emrakul Yes, I know very well that actually do a change is much more large work as imagine it. :-) It was only a suggestion...
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:13
8

Meta Stack Exchange is already the meta for questions about SEDE. Adding a new meta doesn't solve problems, it only adds problems.

The site will have an extremely low traffic, making it prone to spam, low quality posts, etc.

Your proposed topic:

people could share their tips and experiences about the site.

That is generally not what you'd want on a meta site. Chat is good for sharing experiences.

Improve this answer
4
  • "Meta Stack Exchange is already the meta for questions about SEDE. Adding a new meta doesn't solve problems, it only adds problems." <- On this reason, all the meta sites should be closed. It is obviously an argumentation mistake. "people could share their tips and experiences about the site." It is definitely the purpose of a meta site.
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:05
  • 1
    No. It is a Q/A site, not a discussion forum.
    – Patrick Hofman
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:05
  • Yes, meta sites are for questions/answers about their main site. Another false argument.
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:06
  • 2
    Then redefine or clarify your proposed topic
    – Bart
    Commented Mar 16, 2017 at 19:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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