Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

6
  • 20
    I often see 30k (and even 100k) rep users on Stack Overflow suggest poor migrations to other sites. While they may be familiar with their site, I really don't think they necessarily have a good handle on all sites, or even the norms of what is acceptable to have in a question or answer on another site (pardon me while I go and edit out all the 'Hint's on Math.SE).
    – user213963
    Commented Apr 4, 2015 at 16:12
  • @MichaelT agreed. That's why I added a requirement to have at least 500 rep on the target site and did not mention migrations (though I did think of it). I've seen too much crap being migrated by well meaning but uninformed users.
    – terdon
    Commented Apr 4, 2015 at 16:25
  • 1
    Perhaps 1 site × 100k, or 2 sites × 50k, or 3 sites × 33k, or 4 sites × 25k, or 5 sites × 20k, or 10 sites × 10k? :) More seriously, the new gold Illuminator badge might be worthy of cross-site editing privs.
    – tchrist
    Commented Apr 4, 2015 at 17:47
  • 2
    Alternative: allow edits on meta sites after you get 30k anywhere. Metas don't have suggested edits, and it becomes annoying to see grammatical or typographical errors that could be trivially fixed ... if you were on your meta.
    – muru
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 11:37
  • @muru that's a great idea! Please post it as an answer so it can be upvoted.
    – terdon
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 14:00
  • @terdon posted: meta.stackexchange.com/a/272089/270345
    – muru
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 17:07