@JourneymanGeek I would appreciate if you could communicate with me more politely in the future. For example, you could say "please" when you give me orders. Also, if you don't use the contact us link for things like this, why do you order other people to?
@user1271772 Typical procedure in this case is to flag one of their posts on the site for mod attention, or one of your own posts if they don't have any posts visible to you
Based on what I know, SSL certificates are cached and propagated progressively to individual browser, so I guess you have to wait until it fixes by itself..
@JourneymanGeek What you wrote is not incorrect, but there is something odd about the setup / configuration:
The redirection script (for want of better terminology) is written in such a manner that it doesn't catch faults and the server that one is redirected to misconfigured (or configured inconsistently).
There's probably a way to set things up so that they are: 1. resolved, 2. unresolved, or 3. redirected to a server that is A + (not maybe A, maybe A+) - not that there's a reason to panic, just that something isn't correct; and not simply the URL being typed in some of the examples.
The subdomains are not configured the same everywhere, nor the same as the main domain.
The name "meta.physics. ..." is being recognized and redirected to a misconfigured server, while the clearly incorrect name "wrongsitename.physics. ..." is correctly not recognized and thus not redirected; returning the correct error.
@Rob https://meta.*.stackexchange.com/ URLs were never considered valid URLs. At the same time as SSL support was implemented, the URL scheme was changed, so only http://meta.*.stackexchange.com/ and https://*.meta.stackexchange.com/ URLs are valid.
@ShadowWizardisVaccinating Ehhh.... I'm preeeettty sure that's the standard reply for retagging stuff that was until now tagged status-review ;) New bugs can always be reported me thinks.
It's okay. If they are going to work on it, we can put a status-review on it again. I asked
So, just flag anything again and we can retag it once it's on that list. I guess it does help to keep the stuff on the list for review to a minimum, makes other things surface easier :)
Rene and I got a deferred on double voting because there's no room on the roadmap, but it's an important (and probably not too difficult) thing to fix; and from the sounds of it 6-8 months would be optimistic - so declined isn't being misused (IMU).