5

This is SE-network-wide behavior. It has been brought up on MSE and is by design. The answer to why is "performance reasons" (specifically, to deal with a denial of service attack): Requests from anonymous users to some of these routes were causing an unacceptably large performance hit a few days ago, potentially hurting the experience for many other ...


4

That question would have gotten closed on Stack Overflow. It is a bad question - OP is asking people to do his work for him and would have gotten shot down rather quickly. That is orthogonal to your question though - there are up to 5 slots for migration on every Stack Exchange site - sites still in beta only have a migration path to their child-meta (for ...


3

An alternate solution is to leave the proposed migration site as a comment, and allow the mods to do the migration (we can always do this, regardless of status).


2

This is by-design. From the SE meta: The review indicator in the top-bar is not calculated on a per-user basis, but on a per-site basis. The counts in the review queue itself are calculated on a per-user basis. So, when there are reviews that you've already acted on but still need action from more users, they'll still show in the indicator bar.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible