<p><a href="http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/6635183#6635183">At the end of October, Shog9 said</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>If SO migrations are truly a problem, then you get removed as a migration target completely. No user migrations, period.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>as a response to <a href="http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/150206/regarding-the-high-number-of-rejected-migrations-from-stack-overflow-to-server-f">this m.SO question about the rising number of bad migrations</a>.</p>

<p>Since that question was posted, we've paid more attention to the inbound migrated questions list and the percentage rejected has risen to 40% with no end in sight. It's pretty easy to see that if things continue as they are now, we should easily be over 50% rejections by the new year.</p>

<p>At what point do we actually consider the option of removing ourselves as a migration target? 50%? 60%? Now?</p>

<p>Some mods and people in chat at the time were OK with that. Others thought it was too extreme. That's when the number was only 25% rejected. How do we feel about this now that we've had a month's worth of attention on it and are beginning to see things a bit more clearly?</p>