3

If a question is migrated by close voters or mods and the user cannot ask questions on the target site (they reached question ban or are suspended) then the migration does not go through: Block migration if user is suspended/question-blocked at destination.

I want to ask basically two things:

  • Can the users who consider flagging/close-voting for migration find out that this is going to happen? (This could maybe make them reconsider they vote, especially if the information is easily accessible.) If not regular users, can at least mods from the original site find out in advance that the migration will not go through?
  • If the post was already migrated and the migration was rejected, is then the information that the migration was rejected and what was the reason displayed somewhere? (This could prevent some confusion - users might ask why the question was not migrated.) Again, if this information is not available to regular users, can at least mods find out in some way that this was the case?

I will add that I am asking this after I encountered something like this on MathOverflow. There is a question on local meta: Blocked migration to MathSE. The post on the main site which was not migrate is: Why is $O(n;k)$ not connected, and has four connected components?

As far as I know that, if a migration was rejected for more usual reasons (closed on the target site, missing tag on the target site), then I can find some information about this:

  • In the migration statistics (under moderator tools) - which has list of rejected migrations. But this is only available for 10k+ users, so I cannot check on MathOverflow whether something about this specific situation is displayed there.
  • The text "Migration Rejected" is displayed both in revision history and timeline. I will give some example from a site where I have access to migration stats, so I can easily find some examples. For this question you can see read that migration was rejected both in the revision history and the timeline. (Information in the migration statics gives more details than revisions and timeline. In the migration stats I can also see that in this case the question was closed as "off-topic" on the target site.)

However, when I looked at the question on MathOverflow, I see the information that migration was rejection neither in the revision history nor in the timeline. (As I've mentioned I do not have sufficient reputation to see migration stats - if somebody confirms whether or not some information is displayed there, I'll add this information to the question.)

  • 1
    Based on a comment from animuson I saw earlier this week I understand that a postban is calculated dynamically at the time of submission / migrating. Not something you can lookup upfront. – rene Apr 21 '18 at 13:28
  • Another good reason for restricting 'migration' to the OP. OP searches for a site where its question is better-suited and on-topic, copy-pastes its content into a question on the new site and then deletes it from the old site. There - migration done and, if there is some problem, the OP deals with it, not some unrelated party. – Martin James Apr 21 '18 at 15:15
  • @rene You probably mean this comment, right? – Martin Apr 21 '18 at 18:32
  • @Martin yep, that is it. Sorry that I didn't bother to search for it. – rene Apr 21 '18 at 18:51
  • 1
    I am not convinced that "missing tag on the target site" would result in a different display regarding timeline and migration stats. Would you have an example? See mathoverflow.net/posts/150380/revisions for an example of a question that wa sI think rejected for tag-reasons. – quid Apr 24 '18 at 16:21
  • @quid It seems that you are right. The example linked in this Meta MathOverflow discussion does not show anything about the rejected migration in revision history/timeline. So we only see rejected migration there if it was rejected via closure on the target site? (Edit: Lol, while you edited your comment I have linked to the same post. We had clearly the same idea where to look.) – Martin Apr 24 '18 at 16:25
  • Yes, I guess so. In the other cases the question never 'lands' on the target site. One might say, that in the migration is not really rejected, rather the system refuses to perform it. I think it is good that for the stats it is kept separately. I agree though that the timeline could be more telling. Regarding the "reconsider" point: if they'd reconsider, strictly they voted wrong to begin with. If it is not off-topic, don't vote to close. The option to migrate is an after thought after it is established it is off-topic. (Sure there are some corner cases). Sorry for late edt of other cmnt. – quid Apr 24 '18 at 16:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .