Now that this is implemented, and the fact that we have site specific metas, it'd be nice to have a link on questions for creating a meta-discussion associated with them.

This discussion on gaming.meta is an example of its use; tags and the title could be pre populated with specific values regarding the question being discussed.

This would make it easier to discuss specific questions, helping to remove discussion from the comments in the parent site.

  • 1
    I conceived this as a marketing tool rather than a moderation tool. -1 because of the "near" future of per-site chat sites with per-question rooms.
    – badp
    Commented Sep 7, 2010 at 21:57

2 Answers 2



I don't want to deal with a meta questions every time the OP disagrees with a set of close voters, therefore I'd prefer not to have such a thing.


Low level discussions about a question should be in the comments for that question.

If they raise more serious or wider issues then take it to the site meta.

  • This would be meant for discussion about the very existence of a question, if it's off topic and the like -- that belongs on meta.
    – juan
    Commented Sep 7, 2010 at 21:52
  • Here is the problem I have with that approach, a question comes in, there is debate, the comments get up to 11 and everyone just kind of gives up because the conversation is too convoluted, or, someone makes a meta thread. Example: gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/6664/starcraft-2-banlist
    – tzenes
    Commented Sep 7, 2010 at 21:55
  • @Juan: For the most part discussion of on-topic vs. off-topic should start in the comments. Both for convenience and so that the meta site is not so flooded with is-this-question-OK topics that other material can not be found. Moving to meta is appropriate for when there is a wide-spread disagreement over the appropriateness of a whole category or when the comment thread becomes uncivil. Commented Sep 7, 2010 at 22:04

You must log in to answer this question.

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