Another reason for closing this question is that it has nothing whatsoever to do with electronic design! – Leon Heller May 30 at 15:29

See the Help. It is intended for design questions: electronics.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic – Leon Heller May 30 at 16:43

From the link above:

This site is for electronics and electrical engineering professionals, students, and enthusiasts. We ask and answer questions about electrical and electronics engineering topics, which include electronics, physical computing, and those working with microcontrollers, Arduinos and embedded systems. We feel the best Electronics Design questions have a schematic, links to pertinent datasheets or some source code in them, but if your question generally covers …

The last sentence mentions "Electronics Design" questions, but doesn't actually suggest that electronics.stackexchange is limited to them.

What is the correct interpetation?

| |
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Leon Heller What say you? \$\endgroup\$ – user322404 Jun 9 '15 at 14:10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I have edited your question to remove the argumentative passage in a attempt to teach by example of how to ask questions here. You can get in someone's face, or you can maybe get help here, but not both. The former will eventually get your account suspended if it's down too often or too egregiously. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Jun 9 '15 at 14:44
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I can see your nostril hairs as you look down your nose at me. Why can't you answer without being haughty and rude? \$\endgroup\$ – user322404 Jun 9 '15 at 14:53
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I am giving up. I will flag any further postings of yours for moderator attention when they are deliberately argumentative, insulting, or personal. Again, this site is not a good match for you. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Jun 9 '15 at 15:17
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ Leon does not speak for all of us (or even a majority of us) when he claims things are off topic. I'm not sure that he understands the scope of the site, and I ignore/delete his comments when I run across them. That does not excuse any of this. \$\endgroup\$ – W5VO Jun 9 '15 at 15:48

EE.SE is not limited to just specifically design of electronic systems, but question should be related to electronics, most of which will be issues that come up during design. More generally, this site is about electrical engineering and issues that come up during electrical engineering activity.

However, some questions just don't work well with the Q&A format of this site. This is not a "forum" or similar that are meant to be a collections of conversations. It is for answering specific questions within the scope of the site. For this to work, questions need to be clear, specific, and reasonably answerable. Questions that end up soliciting opinions, are broad in scope, or have no clearly identifialbe right answer or objective way to measure the rightness of answers don't work here.

Given the above, we have identified certain topics that don't work but come up often enough to call them out as specific cases of questions that we don't allow here. Others the community has decided it doesn't want here. It doesn't matter for which reason, but repair questions and shopping advice questions are examples of questions that are specifically banned.

| |
  • \$\begingroup\$ The first paragraph was an answer, but the rest of your rant was unnecessary and baiting. Shame on you. \$\endgroup\$ – user322404 Jun 9 '15 at 14:57
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ I tried to explain this site objectively and without getting personal. You really should read and try to understand the last two paragraphs too. However, from your collective activity here it's becoming clear you won't or can't. Bottom line is this site just isn't for you. At this point all I can say is that it would be best for both you and us if you went elsewhere. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Jun 9 '15 at 15:12
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @user322404 - Actually, Olin wasn't ranting on the last two paragraphs. He's just describing how the site is. The strict Q&A format used by SE was a deliberate design decision so that you don't have to read through 20 pages of posts in a thread and pick up the little crumbs to make up a useful answer. Instead of posting entry after entry, like in a forum, users here will edit their questions and answers as result of comments to improve them over time, so that when other users get here, the question and the answers are useful and concise. ... \$\endgroup\$ – Ricardo Jun 17 '15 at 19:53
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ ... There's nothing personal, really. It's just a different way of organizing things that is not clear for forum users. We've also been through that learning step, as every new user, including me and Olin. \$\endgroup\$ – Ricardo Jun 17 '15 at 19:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ I don't feel that it is personal when a question is improved. The issue is the question was shut down for an invalid reason; I was told I was not a good fit, not that the question was not a good fit. That is a personal attack and should not be tolerated, let alone upvoted. \$\endgroup\$ – user322404 Oct 25 '15 at 15:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ The original question that sparked 'this' was neither a repair question nor a shopping question, so that part of the 'answer' is inflammatory, not useful. It was a 'reverse engineering' question about a procedure to identify a part in power supplies in general. It was not asking for opinions; it was asking for the one most efficient procedure to go about determining the obviously burned-out part. It was not asking how to repair a specific power supply, although the answer might be considered useful in the repair field as well. \$\endgroup\$ – user322404 Oct 25 '15 at 15:40

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .