This post was just migrated to the car mechanics site:
Why?
It is a 100% electronics question and has absolutely nothing to do with cars at all. Car mechanics can't answer questions about the behavior of CAN transceivers or about line impedance.
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
5
2 Answers
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
6
It shouldn't have been. Migration should only happen when something is OFF TOPIC HERE, and on topic there. This is clearly an on topic Electrical Engineering question. The mod who migrated it single-handedly does this to any question that even mentions a car, arduino, or raspberry pi to those other stack exchange sites.
Flagged for migration review by Mechanics mods.
Update: The question has been closed on Mechanics as Migration Rejected. It can be voted to reopen here now.
Further update: The question has been reopened here.
-
3\$\begingroup\$ For what it's worth, a few hours ago I flagged the migrated post with: "You may already be aware of this one; I wanted to be sure. There was a question migrated from EE to MV that has caused a kerfuffle :) You may want to reverse the migration and give it back, if possible. Question [here], Meta discussion [here]. Thanks!" The flag was declined: "declined - flags should only be used to make moderators aware of content that requires their intervention" \$\endgroup\$– bitsmackCommented Jun 13, 2019 at 20:51
-
\$\begingroup\$ @bitsmack Once a question is migrated it's up to the users of the target site to decide whenever they want to keep it or not. It was not your call. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 14, 2019 at 6:44
-
\$\begingroup\$ @DmitryGrigoryev I'm sure you're correct. I don't understand how the users (as opposed to the mods) could choose to accept or reject it, though, so I had assumed it should have been the mods' responsibility. It looks like I should look up the rules of migration! \$\endgroup\$– bitsmackCommented Jun 14, 2019 at 8:49
-
\$\begingroup\$ @Users can reject a migration by voting. A mod would have to decide that single handedly, based on your flag. Most of the time mods prefer to let the community decide \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 14, 2019 at 18:52
-
8\$\begingroup\$ @Dmitry except here where a mod prefers not to let the community decide. \$\endgroup\$– PasserbyCommented Jun 14, 2019 at 21:05
-
2\$\begingroup\$ I've added a link to the returned question on EE.SE to your answer. I hope you don't mind. Thanks to you and @W5VO for reopening it. \$\endgroup\$– bitsmackCommented Jun 21, 2019 at 18:35
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
17
I consulted with the Mechanics.SE mods a few days ago. They said that the question is within their knowledge, and that they had similar questions before.
The O.P. will get the best of both worlds: principles from EEs, practical advice from fellow mechanics.
update:
Notice the upvotes on that question about CAN. The question and one of the answers got upvoted after the migration to Mechanics.SE .
-
18\$\begingroup\$ But the question has nothing to do with cars! CAN is used everywhere, not just in cars. \$\endgroup\$– LundinCommented Jun 12, 2019 at 7:45
-
20\$\begingroup\$ The fact they say it's "within their knownledge" doesn't necessarily means it makes sense to migrate it. Home mains cabling is within our knowledge, but do you want all cabling questions from DIY.SE to end up on EE.SE? The way the question is fomulated makes it much more fit to the EE site than Mechanics. And it already had answers from EE users. \$\endgroup\$– dimCommented Jun 12, 2019 at 8:41
-
9\$\begingroup\$ Looked very much an EE question to me. \$\endgroup\$– MCGCommented Jun 12, 2019 at 12:47
-
20\$\begingroup\$ I mean, by that logic we should migrate everything that uses SPI and I2C to the Arduino stack exchange because they have "experience" with SPI and I2C. It wasn't off-topic here, so it shouldn't have been migrated. \$\endgroup\$– W5VOCommented Jun 12, 2019 at 17:38
-
16\$\begingroup\$ The real problem is the SE has no mechanism for addressing this kind of pattern of moderator misbehavior. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 13, 2019 at 5:47
-
\$\begingroup\$ Different logic, @W5VO. Arduino.SE moderators wouldn't approve SPI and I2C questions migrated to Arduino.SE . \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 13, 2019 at 8:03
-
14\$\begingroup\$ @NickAlexeev, no, it's the same logic. It was an absolutely ridiculous decision to migrate this question. It was very, very clearly on topic here and should have stayed that way. \$\endgroup\$– MCGCommented Jun 13, 2019 at 8:18
-
10\$\begingroup\$ Nick, could you perhaps comment on questions you plan to migrate before you do, and refrain from a migration it you get negative comments from the community? Especially on questions which have been upvoted or answered. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 14, 2019 at 7:17
-
2\$\begingroup\$ @DmitryGrigoryev That's a good idea. Judging by the response to this, I'd say it is a good way to go \$\endgroup\$– MCGCommented Jun 14, 2019 at 7:36
-
6\$\begingroup\$ ??? What ??? The question didn't mention one single time the word car or any other mechanical term. How on earth that was a defensible migration action?!? So the only apparent logic in that migration is "CAN is heavily used on cars, the post asks for CAN then let's migrate it to mechanics.SE". The same logic is applicable to a dozen other topics (e.g. LED lighting, ABS plastic, glass windows, fire retardant carpets, etc. ). So let's dump on mechanics.SE any post on the SE network mentioning something that is used on cars! Come on! ... \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 15, 2019 at 12:17
-
8\$\begingroup\$ ... A moderator did a silly mistake, OK, it happens. Apologize, try to revert the action and get over it. Just don't add insult to injury by defending such a mistake! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 15, 2019 at 12:18
-
2\$\begingroup\$ @NickAlexeev Unfortunately, I don't spend much time in chat, so I will likely miss on such migration announcements. What I will almost certainly see is a comment on a question I'm about to answer. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 9:59
-
2\$\begingroup\$ @Loreno I'm not defending a mistake. He asked me "why". He wanted to know my rationale. I answered what I was thinking at the time when I was arranging the migration of the question. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 14:08
-
8\$\begingroup\$ Well, sorry, It doesn't seems so (maybe a communication mismatch). Your recent update to your post seems to be reinforcing the idea that you think the migration was OK. The fact that someone on that site had the knowledge to give nice answers doesn't mean it was OK to migrate it. It is irrelevant. If someone migrated here a question from SO about, say, the Lua language, I could probably write quite a decent answer. And Lua is used in embedded systems. But if the question weren't about embedded systems, would my good answer indicate that it was OK to migrate it here? I don't think so. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 20:36
-
6\$\begingroup\$
Notice the upvotes on that question about CAN. The question and one of the answers got upvoted after the migration to Mechanics.SEYeah, cause I upvoted them as good. Not to mean they belong there. \$\endgroup\$– PasserbyCommented Jun 21, 2019 at 3:21
differentialtag on the question into MV.SE'sdifferentialtag, which is completely different. Did I already say that I hated adjective tags? \$\endgroup\$differentialis one of the most common "special" adjective across a huge range of different scientific fields, so it's particularly nasty! By "special" I mean "stick that word to a substantive and you have a cool sub-field" :-) Compare (just off the top of my head) differential amplifier, differential gear (mechanics), differential analysis (math), differential diagnosis (medicine), differential psychology, differential stress (geology, civil eng.) and more. UGH! \$\endgroup\$