While browsing math.meta, I noticed that the HNQ section was on the side:

HNQ appears in the bottom right

But that isn't what I come to a meta site for. Perhaps, could we have an HNQ chosen from meta posts replacing this?

2 Answers 2


That's not what the per-site metas are for.

The purpose (or at least, a purpose) of HNQ is to draw the attention of people who do not frequent a given site to a question which they might find interesting. In this way, we hope to facilitate cross-pollination of sites, show people content from outside their usual milieu, and promote the growth of the sites which are lucky enough to get featured. In short: we explicitly want people who have never visited a given site before to click through to it via HNQ.

The purpose of a per-site meta is to serve as a discussion forum and informal steering committee for its associated community. People who have never visited the site before are not really members of the community (yet). So if we advertise a question on a per-site meta, then we are encouraging people to participate who may have very little context on the discussion. This is unlikely to improve the quality of the meta, and may worsen it by adding noise.

Perhaps we could temper this by only showing questions from the communities of which you are a member. However, I immediately see a number of issues:

  • Who is a member of a given community? Do you need to earn a certain amount of rep (could be overly burdensome)? Just create an account (most people can do that in two clicks)? Something else?
  • Currently, everyone sees more or less the same HNQ content. Specializing it per-person is likely to require a significant amount of developer time, and might be more taxing on the SE servers.
  • What should we show if we decide that you're only a member of one or two communities? You'd have a lot of content in the sidebar from the same few metas, and much of it would be redundant to the current meta's main question feed.

I believe that nothing good can come of this, and do not think this feature should be adopted.


Are you really interested in questions from other sites' metas if you don't participate on those sites? I don't think anybody wants to see a (meta) HNQ list full of:

  • should we burninate this tag?
  • why was this question closed?
  • why was my flag on this comment declined?
  • how dare a moderator edit my post?!
  • can we reopen this question?
  • why do we have both tagA and tagB?

Per-site metas are advertised on their corresponding main sites. Those are the people who should care.

Besides, the last thing any per-site meta needs is to have people who don't know anything about the site, and who can upvote but not downvote, show up in droves to weigh in because somebody made a clickbait title about rude comments or something.

You must log in to answer this question.

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