Stack Overflow has been added as a migration target for off-topic Code Review questions.

Why was the community consultation process overlooked before adding that "target"?

Personally I feel that adding that as a target is going to lead to a number of negative impacts on Code Review, and it will devalue the site.

Can it be removed as a target?

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Can you elaborate a bit on how exactly being able to migrate questions asking to fix broken code and presenting us with a MCVE, could devalue CR? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 2:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mat'sMug - yes, I can elaborate, but that's not the point of this question. The question is why the community was not consulted..... On all other stack exchange communities I am aware of, there is normally a meta post before migration targets are discussed, not announcements after the fact. \$\endgroup\$
    – rolfl
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 2:43
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I know you didn't say anything about this, but it was pointed out to me that other people who end up here might be concerned, so general FYI: this migration path only goes one way, from CR to SO; it doesn't let questions come from SO to CR. That surely would require more community discussion. \$\endgroup\$
    – Pops
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 16:34

1 Answer 1


I'm the one who enabled the migration targets earlier today. I was going to post an announcement here on meta, but some other stuff popped up so I punted it until tomorrow... well, I guess I don't really need to anymore?

It was pointed out to me at the end of last week that CR was still missing migration targets and community ads*, which should have been enabled with the first part of graduation. In my haste to fix the problem, I just enabled a couple targets and let the mods know. I picked based on stats of where CR has actually frequently migrated questions to in practice and the fact that this community has an excellent track record of migrating questions appropriately (by which I mean that migrations are not rejected on their destination sites).

I apologize if it feels like I was stepping on toes or pushing things out by diktat here, and it is entirely possible that I was too hasty in choosing targets, too. I was intending to give y'all something you deserved and we dropped the ball on, and that I was under the impression you wanted. I don't think we have any formal community consultation process for choosing migration targets, but feedback is always welcome here on meta... if you want to discuss the pros and cons of specific migration targets though, please start a new question, so that we're not mixing up two issues in one place ("how the current situation came to exist" vs. "are migration paths desirable and if so which").

* As for community ads, those run on half-year cycles, roughly aligning with the first and second halves of the calendar year. I'm sorry that we didn't get ads up and running for you during the current cycle, but they'll definitely be working starting with the next cycle (so, Jan. 1, 2016, give or take a few days).

  • \$\begingroup\$ Of the average 1 question per week migrated, they are all adequately handled by moderator flags, they are almost all heavily edited before migration, and the statistics don't count how many migrations were rejected because the asker was question-banned on Stack Overflow. \$\endgroup\$
    – rolfl
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 3:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ Related \$\endgroup\$
    – Phrancis
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 4:02
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl I don't really see any reason for why the statistics should include the number of question-banned, those questions never get migrated in the first place, just deleted. How the questions of SO-question-banned users are treated will not change. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 7:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SimonForsberg - the numbers matter because a significant number of questions that are suitable for migration are only asked here on Code Review because the user cannot ask on Stack Overflow so they come here "fishing". \$\endgroup\$
    – rolfl
    Commented Nov 18, 2015 at 11:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ Hey @Pops, I'm happy to see this turned on, but am concerned that questions will be migrated that should just be closed because users with little experience (500 rep) will be able to migrate (with a few other votes, granted). Any news on decoupling privilege levels from design yet? I don't mean to badger about it, but... It's really kind of the one thing we needed from graduation. \$\endgroup\$
    – RubberDuck
    Commented Nov 20, 2015 at 11:45
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ No decoupling news, but privilege levels should increase soon, because your design is in the works! In the meantime, I'm keeping an eye on how the migration path gets used in practice, and I'm sure your mods are doing the same. \$\endgroup\$
    – Pops
    Commented Nov 20, 2015 at 19:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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