3
\$\begingroup\$

I am a regular consumer of Stack Overflow and a big fan of it. I joined SE:EE yesterday with the expectation of participating in a community similar to SO just on a different topic.

However, I'm somewhat disappointed by this community here, especially concerning the following points:

  • Too many - in my opinion for hobbyists fairly reasonable - questions are downvoted for no reason.
  • People here seem to invest most of their time in commenting the initial question and whether it should be closed or not instead of answering it.
  • On SE:EE the words "school" or "assignment" seem to be synonyms for "please close my question".

Further, a user here loves to post the following sentence (in response to this question):

Few things in life are learned by watching videos only. Start with something more simple. No-one here's going to solve this for you.

With all respect, but people don't join this website to get a moral sermon given. He doesn't even give related literature where the asker would find "something more simple". Also if "No-one here's going to solve this for you." what the hell is the purpose of this site?!

I would also like to encourage all of you to have a look at https://electronics.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic. I appears that some users here are not aware of this website's targeted audience.

I'm sorry, but this community doesn't really encourage participating and with its current active users I can hardly see a bright feature for SE:EE.

Feel free to downvote this feedback.

P.S. Why is there no feedback tag?

P.S.S. I just read you post here dear Olin: https://electronics.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5786/139530. Honestly I'm speechless by your destructive thinking.

Unfortunately, there will always be some wannabe that can't resist looking smart and tries to answer a bad question.


We need to make this unpleasant and costly for the do-gooders.


The original question was crap, and was being handled accordingly. Then some misguided do-gooder answered. Even worse, another misguided do-gooder then grossly edited the question. The net result is that the OP dumped crap on us, and with no additional effort of his own, got the desired result.

I'm sorry but this quotes of you, together with your weird profile picture, doesn't look like a mentally sound person. (somebody had to tell you)

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ (1) Analysis. (2) The brightest side of EE.SE is when people (incl. you and me) find the EE.SE answers with google. \$\endgroup\$ – Nick Alexeev Feb 20 '17 at 17:00
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ LOL about the profile picture. I guess you don't have any way to know I'm not a psychopath stalking you at this very moment. Have you checked behind the bush outside? How do you know I'm not lurking there? As for quoting me, don't be sorry. All those quotes still apply today as much as they did when I wrote them. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Feb 20 '17 at 18:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ 1) If the user was a member of SO, then why did they break the rules and create an addition user. 2) It doesn't take that much time to edit your question and try again 3) People need to realize that if they are asking for free homework help, they'd better show some effort. \$\endgroup\$ – Voltage Spike Feb 28 '17 at 19:35
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ Maybe we should add a new meta-tag, "rant-against-olin", they seem common enough. \$\endgroup\$ – pipe Mar 10 '17 at 18:58
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The question seems to confirm that this EE.SE is toxic with -3 votes at present given the sincerity of the question. To myself and others of legitimate social skills, this smacks of the immaturity of the frequent users & Mods. on this site and lack of pre-emptive training or spec-writing skills to help users make a good question by using specs. with a question about some measurable parameter to leave out the nonsensical questions. The stats on down-votes would prove this. \$\endgroup\$ – Tony Stewart EE75 Apr 11 '19 at 20:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ what daya think? @NickAlexeev How does this compare to the Math.SE or Physics.SE that have much lower toxicity and higher competence level users attracted. I Think too many users dont use Google to find answers before posting a question. Maybe before publishing each question a script ought to include a Google preview of results to the user and ask the question. have you looked for an answer yet? or even a EE.SE search before accepting the question. hmm maybe it's been thought of already... NIHS \$\endgroup\$ – Tony Stewart EE75 Apr 11 '19 at 20:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Sunny You're overrating sincerity. \$\endgroup\$ – Nick Alexeev Apr 11 '19 at 21:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NickAlexeev The intent to communicate with other people's examples shows sincerity, not his bias, it was not diplomatic but it was an honest reflection of reality from a futile question with expected negative response \$\endgroup\$ – Tony Stewart EE75 Apr 11 '19 at 21:36
9
\$\begingroup\$
Too many - in my opinion for hobbyists fairly reasonable - questions are downvoted for no reason.

Then your opinion is obviously not that of the downvoters, and not in sync with the norms here.

Quality is very important, and is ultimately what keeps the experts here, which keeps this a good place to ask questions. Allowing low quality questions to persist hurts the site. Having a slightly lower question volume by discarding low quality questions does no harm since the desirable questions are still there.

People here seem to invest most of their time in commenting the initial question and whether it should be closed or not instead of answering it.

Again, quality is important, see above. To dispense with low quality questions with least harm to the site, they must not be answered. If someone writes a low quality question and gets the desired result, they'll be back doing the same thing again. Even worse, others will see that it works, so they'll be doing the same thing too.

On SE:EE the words "school" or "assignment" seem to be synonyms for "please close my question".

When school assignments are just dumped on us, then yes, absolutely!

people don't join this website to get a moral sermon given

But here, as like most other places in life, they may get one when exhibiting a lazy, entitled, or otherwise bad attitude.

He doesn't even give related literature...

Not his job.

"No-one here's going to solve this for you."

Right, they won't, or at least shouldn't. Pay attention to what "this" is referring to, which is handing you a solution to a homework problem.

We can help with homework here, but we require you to:

  1. Show that you've put some effort into solving the problem.

  2. Explain what specific aspect you are stuck on.

  3. Generally exhibit a attitude of wanting to learn and understand.

Those just looking for the answer need not apply.

Feel free to downvote this feedback.

Done.


Your complaint seems to be about the question "Circuit analyse [on hold]". To answer the question you really should have asked, this is a crappy question because:

  1. It shows sloppiness right in the title! That's the first thing everyone sees. If the OP doesn't even care enough to get that right, then there is a good chance that any effort spent trying to teach him would be wasted. Lack of attention to details basically says "Eh, you lot don't matter, so I can throw whatever slop at you and expect you to deal with it, my servants!". That's a really dumb thing to say to volunteers who you are asking for a favor.

  2. Couldn't even bother to capitalize the first word of the first sentence. I remember starting to get a screw this attitude about here. I would have overlooked the wrong word in the title if the rest of the question at least showed effort to be respectful. No matter how little anyone knows about English, there is no excuse for not capitalizing the first word of sentences. It's a universal rule, and common to many languages.

  3. The capitalization is exceedingly sloppy in other places. Why is "BY" capitalized, but then "r6" not? This make no sense. It's not only sloppy, but you'd actually have to go out of your way to mess this up. In any case, this should have been immediately obvious upon proofreading before submitting the post. Either the OP was too lazy to bother checking what he wrote, or to arrogant to care whether it was a mess or not. Either way, he's thumbing his nose at all the volunteers here.

  4. There is no period at the end of the sentence. This guy is really just dumping crap on us, and clearly has no respect for the site nor those he is seeking a favor from. At this point I had a serious screw this attitude towards this question.

  5. The only thing it asks is whether I can do something. How is that relevant? It's not about electrical engineering at all.

    Perhaps the OP meant "Is it possible to derive the loop currents from ...", or maybe "Please show me how to derive the ...".

    If all else had been respectful, neat, and showing attention to detail, I might have inferred one of the two alternate questions and given some slack. However, given the gross disrespect the OP had already exhibited towards me, I used his sloppiness against him to get the question closed expediently. I also downvoted for the disrespect and sloppiness.

Despite the above, I still explained one reason for closing, which is that we don't just hand you complete solutions to homework problems here.

The OP then came back with some snippy comments, totally sealing his fate. FakeMoustache even then still tried to explain what was wrong, but the OP came back with some irrelevant and laughable statement about watching videos. That's when he got the "sermon", which was actually quite restrained. At this point I was thinking of responses that started with "Look, asshole...", but we're not allowed to say that here, so I didn't.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Completely agree here. Writing is a form of communication. While it may be difficult for some and easy for others, it certainly is no more complicated than electrical engineering. To me, being sloppy and lazy with written communication suggests the same approach to engineering. I prefer a world with good engineering, not mediocre and unsafe. If you feel that lazy writing is acceptable, create your résumé or CV that way and see how effective it is. \$\endgroup\$ – JYelton Oct 10 '17 at 18:32

You must log in to answer this question.
https://electronics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6106/seee-surprisingly-toxic
electronics.meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-21
152213
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:EMU7QB5RQCMW4NG3WVM4CLS5NXJTBKLI
<urn:uuid:57e591f9-9e79-4878-a85c-16b8ddd3d39a>
2021-05-17T04:18:02Z
151.101.129.69
text/html
sha1:C56KKY53AG4HRHIDSUFEC2Z33IBPE5FC
<urn:uuid:dc86cd26-4d41-4a94-9d16-429f6c9ffac2>
https://electronics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6106/seee-surprisingly-toxic
response
<urn:uuid:ae355c9a-1f4a-4229-b207-24fcac244a03>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-21
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-167.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/