A while ago, I asked this question. The answers seemed to suggest that if the question is about emacs rather than about lisp coding or whatever, then it should go on superuser. So I had a question that I assumed was about emacs. So I asked it on SU, but within seconds it had been migrated to SO. Someone on SO voted to close the question.

So I think there needs to be a better policy on where these kinds of questions belong, and it needs to be consistently applied.

  • Well, that's...interesting. Site selection in cases like this is a matter of judgment and obviously not everyone agrees. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Nov 25 '10 at 14:38
  • 1
    I voted to migrate to SU when I replied to the question on SO. I consider general Emacs questions to be off-topic on SO since they have nothing to do with programming. I agree that a better policy would be nice (if people could be convinced to apply it!) — my impression is that currently many questions are closed on SU just because one of the ♦ moderators (usually Diago) thinks they might get a better response elsewhere (even when they are unambiguously on-topic on SU). – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' Nov 26 '10 at 0:42
  • @Gilles: I think whether a question related to emacs belongs on SO or not depends on the question. For example, I think these pretty clearly do: 1. Programming questions about elisp, 2. Use of emacs as a programming tool. Both of these are clearly on-topic according to the FAQ. – Chris Jan 4 '13 at 16:09
  • @Chris I fully agree. That's what I meant by “general Emacs questions”: questions that apply to any Emacs user, not just to programmers. – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' Jan 4 '13 at 16:28

There will always be inconsistency for this sort of thing. What you need to remember is that questions aren't closed/migrated by just a few people who can convene, decide on definite policy and stick to it consistently... these actions are taken by people within a vast community, who will have different interpretations of whatever policy is recommended.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Still it makes sense to strive for consistency. – N.N. Jan 6 '12 at 11:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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