5
$\begingroup$

Today someone had asked a question on the meta site, which was actually a question on mathematics.

It was migrated, correctly, to the main site. There it was closed for lack of context. Being a migrated question, upon closure the question was locked and the migrated copy was "closed as off topic", which just seems a bit strange.

Now, I'm not advocating that we should be more careful when closing migrated questions. But now the process of correcting the question is essentially to delete the one from the meta site and post a new one of the main site (or ask for the question to be explicitly unlocked and/or reopened).

Sure, this might happen once in a sufficiently long time for it to be a non-issue. But why does it happen at all? I doubt anything anywhere on the SE network was migrated from a meta site to its main site, without being a question accidentally asked on the meta site in the first place.

Is it possible that a question migrated from the meta site will be exempt from the usual "rejected migration" process?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The question I refer to in my first line, is this: meta and main versions. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Mar 20 '15 at 13:34
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ I will quote this suggestion mentioned recently in chat: A suggestion (inspired by this and similar situations): never migrate from meta to main. The OP will be better off if their question is closed as OT and they are told to ask on main. Reasons: 1. They will be suggested similar questions based on title. 2. They will be able to choose tags 3. Most importantly, they will be able to improve their question if it gets put on hold. For a migrated question there is no second chance: once it's closed, it's locked. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Mar 20 '15 at 13:44
  • $\begingroup$ Martin, that's also a good idea. To disable that migration path in general. But I think that if we keep it open, then at least make it so when the question is closed, it is not bounced back to the meta site. That's the point of my request. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Mar 20 '15 at 13:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ +1 I agree this should be fixed. $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque Mar 20 '15 at 18:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Martin's reasoning sounds compelling to me. Favoriting this so that I can find it later. $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Mar 20 '15 at 19:03
  • $\begingroup$ While at it, what about the converse (main to meta)? $\endgroup$ – Lord_Farin Mar 21 '15 at 8:14
  • $\begingroup$ @Lord_Farin: Also a valid point. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Mar 21 '15 at 11:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Lord_Farin Those don't present such problems. It takes quite a rant to get a post closed on meta (other than as a duplicate). And those should be simply closed and deleted on main, without moving them to meta. $\endgroup$ – user147263 Mar 21 '15 at 17:18
9
$\begingroup$

The solution, as I posted in chat, is quite simple.

  1. Do not migrate from meta to main.
  2. If you want to migrate from meta to main, see #1.
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It appears since some time voting for migrations to main from meta are not longer and option for users. By the way, do you know when/why/how this happened exactly? $\endgroup$ – quid Apr 28 '15 at 13:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No idea. Maybe Asaf's request here was noticed and addressed in this way. It would be interesting to find the last user-driven migration to main, across SE. But SO, and I suspect some other large sites, had the policy of not migrating to main for a long time. $\endgroup$ – user147263 Apr 28 '15 at 14:03

You must log in to answer this question.

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