I flagged this question to be moved to Unix & Linux. I'm new to flagging questions and I'm not clear why it was decided that the question stay in SF.
I handled that, so I'll tell you why I did what I did:
It's on topic here.
It might also be on topic at Unix & Linux, it might even be more on topic at Unix & Linux (for the sake of argument, say), but at the end of the day, since it's on-topic here, there's just no good reason to move it.
There is a fair bit of overlap between some of the Stack Exchange sites, and a consequence of that is the general rule of thumb I've heard for years is that questions don't get moved, so long as they're on-topic where they're asked.
Questions have been moved because the OP requested it, or for other good reasons, but think about it for a moment - what would happen if we started moving questions between sites just because they're also on topic elsewhere?
Short answer is we'd never stop moving questions that overlap site scopes. What happens when it gets to U&L, and someone there flags it for being on topic at Server Fault? Well, if we accept that as a reason to move it over, it's an equally valid reason to move it back, and then you're in a game of question ping-pong, which is bad for everyone. And that's just with a simple question that's on topic at only two sites. Throw some scripting and a database in there, and you could have questions that would be getting perpetually passed around between four sites, to no one's benefit, everyone's detriment, and causing significant effort on the mod teams as well.
I didn't see this question, but I agree with leaving it on Server Fault. Here's why:
Our target audience is professional system and network administrators. At some point, most of us will have to learn more of how our operating system scheduler works than a simple hand-waving "it's smart, it multitasks" which may suffice for our non-technical users.
This particular question references Linux, but isn't really Linux-specific; it could apply to any operating system (and a good answer to it probably should). It may well be rejected at Unix & Linux for this reason alone.
It's OK for topics to overlap between Stack Exchange sites. Not everything must be on one site only, and indeed, that's pretty much impossible anyway since so many questions have shades and nuances. And, the identical question posted here may get completely different answers on another site, because the audiences have different perspectives (e.g. system administrator, end-user, or even low-level kernel hacker). This has actually happened to me before: I've had an answer migrated to another site, where the answer turned out to be utterly inappropriate for the destination site's audience. Thus it's often useful for different sites to host similar questions for different audiences.
When evaluating the subject matter of a question for possible migration, I am looking for either:
- The subject matter is blatantly off-topic here, and blatantly on-topic there, or
- The question is very unlikely to get a good answer here, and is much more likely to get a good answer there.
This question is in a bit of a grey area, as it fit both here and on U&L. Leaving it here or migrating it would be equally OK in my opinion.
4I think questions should only be moved if they don't fit on the site. This is a concept system administrators should understand (I've interviewed plenty that don't). Furthermore, the question isn't really Unix specific Dec 3, 2014 at 1:47
@KyleBrandt, I don't get why this should be "a concept that system administrators understand". Care to elaborate?– SvenDec 3, 2014 at 1:52
1System administrators manage system resources. CPU is a primary resource and CPU utilization as a percentage is probably the most common way that resource is measured. Having a good understanding of that measurement seems fundamental to me. Dec 3, 2014 at 1:57
4Ah crap, I interpreted that in terms of moderation - a sysadmin should understand why this question shouldn't be migrated. I guess I am a little bit preoccupied with my new tools...– SvenDec 3, 2014 at 2:01
1Oh sorry with "this" I meant the topic of the question Dec 3, 2014 at 2:03