This is largely catalyzed from this question and its subsequent comment chain.
The basic sentiment brings to highlight a very specific site in the network which suffers from two specific problems:
- The site's scope and domain were formally discontinued or ripped from underneath its feet by the OEM.
- The site itself doesn't have a whole lot of activity around it, either.
My perspective in asking this question is that there was an exchange with the moderator dealing with this question that left me puzzled.
For context, the moderator believes that Meta is not the site to discuss whether or not a network site should be closed, and that it should be taken to that site's Meta. The problem with that is that I can see a question that was last touched in 2017 on that site's Meta if I don't move my mouse wheel. This tells me that the community that actually curates and moderates this site is...either reduced to nothing, or has long since packed up.
In essence, facilitating a conversation where no one is strikes me as not having a conversation at all.
While I don't necessarily disagree with the moderator - I do feel like the community should own the choices here - if there is no obvious community, who owns the choices then? How do we get attention to a site that has fallen into disrepair or by the wayside? Not all of us have or want to have to use our inner connections to CMs to shed some light on this. I'd be looking for a more formal kind of pattern to do this so that the community knows how to react when they see a situation like this.
So, what should we do? Does MSE have a role here when there's no obvious community who would?