4
\$\begingroup\$

My question has been closed on the grounds of "Questions on the use of electronic devices are off-topic as this site is intended specifically for questions on electronics design." Whoever closed my question, didn't seem to have read it, as it was not about the use of the devices. It seems quite obvious that both devices (a UPS and a portable power station) are intended for different uses (heck, it's in the name), I've never questioned that. Yet, from a technical perspective they are very similar, which is the premise to my question. It is a question not about use, but about specifications, which is relevant for any design.

If the question for whatever other reason does not fit in electrical engineering, migrate it to some other place.

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I didn't see any evidence in your question that your assertions were generally across the board with those types of product. Neither did I see links to the two products you were looking at. I don't personally think it is a suitable EE question on those grounds alone. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andy aka
    Sep 23 at 15:08
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ "If the question for whatever other reason does not fit in electrical engineering, migrate it to some other place.", frankly, it's not the job of the community to clean up after the poster - the only one who can judge if their question is on-topic somewhere is by the one asking, in consultation with the site's policy. Often a question must be tailored to the specific goals of that site. \$\endgroup\$
    – pipe
    Sep 24 at 17:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Andyaka IMO, those wouldn't be acceptable reasons to close. It doesn't make the question off-topic, because the subject is still on-topic. If the premises of the question are wrong, the correct option would be to post an answer, explaining and justifying why they are wrong. If the OP making wrong assumptions was enough to declare questions off-topic, we could close 90% of the questions asked on the site. \$\endgroup\$
    – dim
    Sep 26 at 9:39
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @dim closure because of needing information i.e. Needs details or clarity. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andy aka
    Sep 26 at 9:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Andyaka "Neither did I see links to the two products you were looking at." Exactly for purpose of generality I avoided links to products. In addition, links to product pages don't age well as those links tend to break down over time when a product gets discontinued. When I first started using SE, I was taught that questions need to be both self-contained and general, that is, of interest to a broader audience than oneself. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 27 at 14:56
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Questions should avoid being over-general in my opinion and specifically on your question where you make the assertions that appear to apply to every similar product ever made and that becomes a nightmare to substantiate. IMHO you need links to the two specific products you were considering. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andy aka
    Sep 27 at 15:16
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @pipe It's a bit of a catch 22. Naturally, it is in the best interest of the non-expert to pose their question in the right form at the right community. So, that's what they try; that's what I try. However, given the non-expertise and the hundreds of communities, it is possible that the non-expert innocently poses their question at the wrong place. Since the non-expert also doesn't have sufficient reputation to have the privilege of merging or migrating, they have no choice but to rely on the assistance of the experts, even if it was their responsibility to do it right in the first place. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 27 at 15:17

2 Answers 2

5
\$\begingroup\$

I agree. I voted to reopen.

The "use of electronic devices" close reason is there to avoid questions like "How do I take a screenshot on my iPhone"? Basically, questions whose answer are/should be in the user manual of the device are off-topic.

But your questions clearly isn't in that league, and, in my opinion, is totally on-topic. You're asking for something technical related to electric engineering.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I voted to reopen as well. The main part of the question is about explaining the meaning of the non-SI unit VA in alternating current circuits, which ought to be perfectly on-topic. \$\endgroup\$
    – Lundin
    Sep 23 at 9:19
2
\$\begingroup\$

If JJM and dim voted to reopen that would be a step in the right direction. So far it has only one reopen vote.

As a moderator I'd consider reopening it but as another moderator was one of the two VTCs I'll leave it for now.

I understand both sides of this - possibly editing to somewhat more emphasise the design aspect of the question. 3 votes to open and some editing as above would probably do it. The aim is to make it a technical question of ongoing value to others. I'd say it managed that already BUT you can improve it.

Flag for moderator attention if the above is done and nothing happens.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Note that JJM (original poster) cannot vote to reopen, as he doesn't have enough rep. You need the view close votes privilege available at 250 rep to cast close/reopen votes on your own questions. \$\endgroup\$
    – dim
    Sep 22 at 8:02

You must log in to answer this question.

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