The Area 51 discuss zone is effectively the child-meta of Area 51 and like all other child-meta sites inherits the reputation of its parent site (Area 51).
The only Meta that doesn't follow this convention is meta.stackexchange.com, which is essentially the support site for the entire network.
If I want to commit to any other, I have to uncommit or any of the committed site must be launched in beta.
Not quite true—the site must be launched and you follow through on your commitment to that site:
I commit to participate actively in [site] for at least three months, especially during the private beta, and to ask or answer at least ten questions.
The proposal has reached Commitment. You can't do anything to the questions now - those questions were for defining the scope of the proposal - that's why it's the Definition stage (orange).
Now it's in the Commitment stage (green). This is where we check if there are enough users who are committed to participating in the site when it launches. Since the ...
You are looking at two different accounts:
Your regular Area 51 account
Your account on Area 51 discuss
The Area 51 dissussion site is the 'meta' site for Area 51, see the Area 51 discuss FAQ. Your reputation there is entirely derived from the main site, but the reputation is synched once an hour or so. Just wait a little while and you'll have 51 points in ...
In addition to your four questions (prior to this one), you've also had six additional questions which have since been removed through the routine maintenance of proposals.
At some point, you must have had five active questions on the site at once to earn the badge. Even if you've since dropped below that that prerequisite five… once a badge is ...
Each tab only shows the proposals that belong under that sort (hot proposals, beta sites, launched sites, etc). If you take a look at the Professional category (for example), you'll noticed that every proposal does not show up under every tab.
hot tab, 6
progress tab, 1
beta tab, 5
launched tab, 2
newest tab, 6
This being Area 51, the sort order is determined by the original proposal date, not how long the resulting site has been active. Since proposals of the past were once allowed to exist over a very long period of time before finally launching, the sort order looks off (by site age)… but it is correct (by original proposal date).
It is a user preference.
At the top of the list of example questions, there are four options for sorting questions. 'My vote', 'active', 'newest' & 'votes'
You can choose how they are sorted. Sometimes I accidentally sort them differently, I imagine this is what just happened to you.
This is simply an artifact of caching, and is usually the culprit wherever you see two numbers that supposedly represent the same thing differ slightly. You'll notice this on Pets SE when it moves into the private beta, until a few hundred questions get into the system.
It's a small performance trade-off to eliminate quite a few queries on each proposal ...
This is by design. The 50 rep is as you described it. The 100 reputation is an account association bonus (essentially, a head start for having another account on the network with 200+ reputation). They are unrelated.
The auto-logging-in-between-multiple-sites functionality is called universal login. Universal login is implemented for our Q&A sites (which Area 51 Discussions is also one).
However, the Area 51 main site is not based on the same codebase, and does not have universal login. So you will need to log in to Area 51 separately. You will still be linked to ...
You can display the year a proposal went through Definition or Commitment by hovering over the date it started (hovering over '4 years ago' shows "2010-07-13 04:04:27Z").
But adding the year to the graph isn't something anyone is likely to address. The graphs were designed to be a visual way to show a proposal's progress. Years after the fact, the site has ...
This is consistent with the behavior of our our per-site metas. On the meta sites (as with the Area 51 discussions), the reputation is not linked.
Since discuss.area51 has no reputation on its own, this is the desired behavior. The 'reputation' tab is a main-site function only, so there's nothing really to link to from the "discussion site" point of view. ...