@DanielFischer: Yes, and I did. As you saw in the aftermath.

@PedroTamaroff and @quid (or any other mod basically, but I have seen that you have discussed cross-posting.

Some time ago, when I edited cross-posting tag-info I have included some posts which I considered useful.

To be more specific, I have linked these two posts: Asking the same question on MSE and MO and Moderator Supported (Official) Guidelines for “Legitimate” CrossPosting?.

I have mentioned this also on meta:

If there are some other improvements of that tag-info or some other links which could be added, I'd be grateful for improvements.

FWIW this would probably be more suitable for the meta chatroom, but this was a room where I was able to ping Mariano Suárez-Álvarez.

Only now I have notice that I have pinged @PedroTamaroff by mistake - sorry for that.

@MarianoSuárez-Álvarez The above was addressed to you - I have pinged Pedro instead of you by mistake.

Hi, Pedro - once again, sorry for pinging you by mistake.

No problem. Not sure how I can help here. ;)

Of course, if you're interested in that, you can too have a look in the tag-info I mentioned. Just to see whether there is something worth adding or correcting.

As you can see most content was added there by myself. I do not want to misrepresent "the official position" of the site. (Although very likely there isn't such thing.)

The reason why I specifically pinged quid and Mariano Suárez-Álvarez was that I saw they discussion in comment on meta which was about cross-posting. So it is quite likely that they might have something to say about this.

I meant their exchange in the comments under quid's answer here: What qualify questions to be in mathoverflow and not in math.stackexchange?

BTW I usually post a comment like this when I see a cross-posted post (where I include link to Willie Wong's answer - the same one which I linked in the tag-info):

@MichaelGreinecker Anything decided/done yet? George is still spewing nonsense on the Meta thread. I do not think it is correct to let nonsense stay up precisely because it is harmful to others. For instance, the official site policy says that hate speech or libel is not permitted. His argument applied to hate speech or libel would imply that we should permit it. That is, of course, ridiculous.

@quid @DanielFischer: Perhaps you moderators should answer user 170039's queries, so that he doesn't have to worry about whether I or George Chen is lying.

Unless, of course, he thinks everyone might be lying... That would be just too bad... Lol...

In any case, if you clear up the comments again, could you retain at least Asaf's comment, as public record of his statement concerning the post he voted on?

@user21820 is this still relevant? The situation is pretty confusing. I am not sure what exactly to confirm. Yes, there are three posts, two self-deleted, one deleted by users.

@MartinSleziak that was not my most constructive discussion I am afraid. But I might write up my thoughts on the matter soon.

@quid I did not bring this up to incite flamewar between mods - although it is obvious that you have rather different opinion in this.

I merely mentioned it for the reasons described above.

I think that in general tag-info might be good place to collect some relevant information for a specific topic. So if somebody else has a look whether some stuff should be added or edited, that would be nice.

And the reason I have pinged you two with this was simply because this issue appeared in your comment exchange.

BTW I was a bit surprised that the OP unaccepted your answer and accepted mine in that question. But I have seen other users doing something similar on the main - always giving accept to the most recent answer. (Maybe to keep it on top and thus more visible...?)

@MartinSleziak since I can keep the guru badge I don't mind ;D

Well, if my answer gets enough upvotes, you could get also populist. Although I do not consider this that likely on this particular question.

IIRC the only badges which can be taken away after somebody gets them are tag-badges.

Either way drawbacks of migration are minimized in some of these discussions. For example, when it is casually asserted that the question might just be migrated back. That gives a wrong idea of what would happen in practice usually. What actually happens is that OP ends up with two closed copies. They can then go about figuring out how to get the version here reopened.

It's getting late here and I have not eaten yet, so I'll have to go.

The discussion about cross-posting would be a bit longer.

If you have some time, you could have a look at some messages in tagging chatroom - but nothing from those things is urgent (they have been around for some time).

Yes and one should be very careful not to conflate reasking an unanswered question with parallel asking. The reason why cross posting is frowned upon is the later. If an OP waits patiently, I think they then should better reask.

Another issue that is minimized is that the migrated question on the target site will never have show up on top of the new queue. It gets inserted according to its original asked date.

And for a final point, I think a common opinion by now is that migrating unanswered posts is somewhat pointless . If anything one might delete the original.

But I'll stop now. I'll look into the tagging room later in the evening.

A remark for context: back then in 2013 I was a huge fan of the migration, especially before MO joined the network, I thought it will solve numerous problems. But over time I came to realize it causes more problems than it solves. Plus, it's an extremely niche subject. Over the last 90 days a grand total about 30 questions was migrated away from this site.

@quid I agree with this opinion, for what it's worth.

This has bothered be before: Questions such as this one popping up in the low quality queue, in which there is no option to flag as spam, indeed, all one can do is vote to delete, in which it is prohibited to delete as spam. So to flag as spam requires one to click on the question link, open in a new tab, and flag. In this case, it seemed clear to me it was an audit, I voted to delete. Success!!! That's not the point though;

...the most appropriate action would be to have flagged as spam, and if I had clicked on the question to open it, to flag the answer (in this case), I would have seen it already deleted as spam. How useful are audits, particularly when the appropriate action is not included as an option?

Yikes, apologies for my typos above!!! :-)

@amWhy what bothers me even more is that if one does any action (comment, edit, etc.) and the audit says the post was not a problem post then you get reprimanded even if your comment was "this is a really nice question. I like this concept a lot so I hope it gets answered."