-2
\$\begingroup\$

I am interested in the explanation of why both flags for "harassment/bigotry/abuse" and "unfriendly/unkind" were declined.

enter image description here

People (including me) come here if they do not understand or forgot something, can not get things to work as they expect, or need guidance. (Or do I misinterpret the purpose of SE.EE and it exists for people to earn reputation on easy/interesting questions on their speciality?)

The statement made "which appears to somehow exclude you" sounds at least inappropriate and pejorative, at most discriminative.

I am not native English speaker, and I can not change it whatever I do. Tell me that I am not a target audience, and misfit for using Texas Instruments' products and services because of it.

Next, if I would be "formally trained" and used matters I asked in question every day I would never come to site asking question, because I have made things working without anyone's help and guidance. And what's about hobbyists not having "formal training" by definition - they are wanted to be excluded from using TI products and services and SE.EE website?

And then, how did writer know that I am (personally) not an electronics designer? Electronics is relatively big field of knowledge and practice, and none can be proficient in everything.

In addition, I consider Texas Instruments is also being offended by this thought. Note that I do not apply for reasons for "[TI] chose their words [technical terms for naming voltages]", I apply for discrimination of the market TI serves - the text in brackets. Such statements are not only bad for community, they are bad for SE as an enterprise having them on its web pages. Do you see the risk?

enter image description here

So why my flags were declined?


Update: I can not find the list of current moderators on SE.EE on any SE.EE web page I usually access. Is this information a secret?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ A list of moderators can be found here: electronics.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators . It's in the 'Users' tab, which is part of the left sidebar. It may have become less visible than it was in previous years, but the intent has never for the list of moderators to be secret. \$\endgroup\$ – W5VO Jul 8 at 15:13
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Maybe I can see this as unkind... maybe... But I think Jonk was careful about what he said. It's possible to misinterpret what was said. But... Harassment? Bigotry? No, I don't think so, far from it. \$\endgroup\$ – KingDuken Jul 17 at 16:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ I have raised one flag first, when it was declined I raised second to see what will happen and if there will be any meaningful feedback. \$\endgroup\$ – Anonymous Jul 17 at 17:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ You said it yourself, you are not a native English speaker so that alone does exclude you. You need to answer yourself if you are formally trained and/or electronic designer. \$\endgroup\$ – winny Jul 23 at 9:25
9
\$\begingroup\$

You read far more into a simple parenthetical comment than was ever intended, and chose to be offended by your interpretation. We really cannot control that. Jonk didn't mean that you were none of those things, only that you seemed to not be at least one of them. And by your own admission, you are indeed not a native English speaker. Hence, the misunderstanding on your part about the terminology that TI used. Nothing more than that was meant.

The comment was made after you realized your error, and he was just trying to explain why the misunderstanding might have occurred, pointing out the differences between yourself and the audience that the paper's author was targeting.

Actually, I looked at the paper myself, and my impression is that it was written by a rather junior engineer at TI, perhaps even an intern of some sort. I'm fairly certain that if a higher-level (more experienced) engineer had written it, it would have been a lot more concise and used less "jargon" — which would have eliminated the confusion that you experienced.

I can not find the list of current moderators on SE.EE on any SE.EE web page I usually access. Is this information a secret?

No, of course not. If you go to the "Users" page (menu item on the left side), there's a tab specifically for "Moderators" (all the way to the right).

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the way to find out who is the moderator in our community. That would not be an issue for me regarding those terms used in the paper if I would be able to find their explanation on the internet. I was unable to find out, and asked the question. I was trying to apply logic to these terms with no definite outcome. \$\endgroup\$ – Anonymous Jul 8 at 11:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ And as I said, Jonk in no way intended that you should not have asked. He was just trying to explain why the question was necessary. \$\endgroup\$ – Dave Tweed Jul 8 at 11:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ I see, most probably I have overreacted, partly because he was making short replies giving me opportunity guessing what he meant, and making the whole from the pieces. I would very appreciate the answer to the question what is what, in the question, and where my mistake is. I am not that lame, just miss a piece of theory and practice on the subject. I am moving further now, appeared that I miss even more knowledge than I thought. \$\endgroup\$ – Anonymous Jul 8 at 11:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ If someone makes a comment that could easily be interpreted as rude, it should be deleted. I think the specific comment here is unfriendly and I doubt it would be tolerated elsewhere on the SE network. This specific case aside, I participate in a whole lot of different SE sites with various accounts and to me, EE has been standing out for many years with a higher bar for tolerated rudeness than pretty much any other site. This is something that should seriously concern the moderator team. \$\endgroup\$ – Lundin Aug 23 at 8:33
8
\$\begingroup\$

I don't see anything offensive with the comment at all, although it's difficult to know for sure since we don't have the whole context.

I think the chose their words to fit their target audience of native English speaking, formally trained, electronics designers

Absolutely. Everything in a datasheet will be written for that audience (except the first page which is written by the marketing department). This should not be a surprise to anyone.

(which appears to somehow exclude you)

Yes, correct by definition since you had a question about it - it appears to exclude you somehow. This is not an insult, it's a factual statement. jonk doesn't know which one of those statements, if any, apply to you, but probably not all of them, or maybe even none.


If your post had stopped there I wouldn't have had any problems, but then you shift into a higher gear:

misfit for using Texas Instruments' products

...what?

excluded from using TI products and services and SE.EE website

...WHAT? No one even insinuated anything like that.

You're apparently reading something that's invisible to the rest of us in that comment.

In addition, I consider Texas Instruments is also being offended by this thought. Note that I do not apply for reasons for "[TI] chose their words [technical terms for naming voltages]", I apply for discrimination of the market TI serves - the text in brackets. Such statements are not only bad for community, they are bad for SE as an enterprise having them on its web pages. Do you see the risk?

Now this is the new style of underhanded censorship we're seeing all across the internet now. You're upset at a user who you thought was being mean to you, and the evil company Stack Exchange does nothing to remove it, so you threaten with "if you keep this user's content on the website, maybe this large company will stop doing business with you".

You see the same tactics everywhere on the larger websites now, but it usually only involves politics. Don't drag it here.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Agreed on not dragging it here. Of course I am upset because we must practice respect to each other and focus on the issue rather than personalities (and this personality discussion does not add value to tech resolution). I had been making these mistakes in the past, now I am striving to be very careful considering various perspectives of how written can be read within and out of context for various cultures and mindsets. I practice the following - if what I am going to say/write does not advance to the resolution, it is better not to say/write that at all - let others make better inputs. \$\endgroup\$ – Anonymous Jul 8 at 10:45
1
\$\begingroup\$

I'll stand up and say that the parenthetical phrase is a violation of the "be nice" policy, and declining the flag is counter to the reasoning behind the be nice policy. That said, I have no idea what happens if the flag is accepted, and suspect that the punishment may be worse than the crime merits. Perhaps a more graded approach to remedies needs to be developed.

I'm also not sure that I completely buy in to the be nice policy, but it is, indeed, the SE policy of record. My participation conveys my willingness to play by the rules.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Specifically, I think the unkind flag, but not the harassment flag, applies. \$\endgroup\$ – Scott Seidman Jul 11 at 1:46

You must log in to answer this question.

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