IMPORTANT POLL: Should there be an off-topic section?

[pcprogrammer]

I wasn't a supporter of adding cooking to the forum much as I contribute there as it is a strong interest of mine.

But do we need a Gardening, Bike, R/C, Car, Travel, Woodworking, Skateboarding, Surfing, Fishing, CAT...... threads or sections on an Electronics forum?

@Ed.Kloonk, swoop in for the kill, CAT's being dissed

Well why not. You seem to have cooking as a side interest. I have Fischer Technik and synthesizers as other hobbies. Others might have what you listed. There is more to life then just electronics. Sure it is the electronics that brings us all to this forum and what I have seen is that many dislike the other forums out there that are about the topics you listed. I guess some of us just like a safe space to talk about those other interest without having to deal with folks that are to abusive.

And for most of the time this forum is such a safe space.

To allow for it to stay safe, I do like the suggestion of keeping it behind membership only doors.

[PlainName]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

Mine is accurate, as is that of everyone I personally know here. Ascribing levels of truthfulness/disclosure to people you don't know is pure and irrelevant speculation.

You really are Mr AVGResponding? Or is that your first name?

[Ranayna]

The only "Personality" Part of my profile thats even filled out is my location. Since that can have a significant impact regarding parts availability and local regulations and customs.
Also it maybe softens the blow if my english comes out garbled and stuffed with german fillerwords
Anything else should in all reality be absolutely irrelevant in a professional discussion. And if it is relevant for some reason, you can bring it up when such a situation comes up.

Anyway, on topic

I would like an "curated" Offtopic section. I would agree to keep the "hot topics" out of the EEVBlog, except maybe in the unlikely case that you are able to find enough competent moderators to keep things civil. And even then i would prefer some topics to be off limits. And there is precedence with the cooking section.
I would think sections on wood and metalworking can be quite successful here. Stuff like that might even be useful related to TEA, covering restoration of old equipment, which often enough is as much metalworking as electronics.

I personally would also like to see the discussions in the TEA Thread to be more split up. The TEA Thread is just too huge and somewhat intimidating to be honest. And if the owner of the first post will not continue updating it, it will become even more so. It's also hard to search. But the TEA section is still empty, so i seem to be somewhat alone with that opinion 

Of course a more accessible TEA section might require increased effort by moderation. Stuff can't fly under the radar, so to speak, as easily. I do not even know how many mods the EEVBlog has. I know of Simon and Halcyon?, but two mods seems to be very few for a board this size.

[bdunham7]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

I'm pretty sure EEVBlog is 99.9% grumpy old men.  Of course not all of them realize that...

[pcprogrammer]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

I'm pretty sure EEVBlog is 99.9% grumpy old men.  Of course not all of them realize that...

Are you sure you want to stick your head above ground level with something you can't prove with proper evidence. 

[CatalinaWOW]

The last few pages have at least partially crystalized my thinking on this subject, and may provide a useful suggestion for moving forward.  There are two very different objectives for me (and I suspect many others on this board).  One is to find and/or share technical information on a variety of subjects.  The other is to chat, share and jest with others who are in some sense "birds of a feather".  As these last two pages have shown this latter objective tends to creep in and dilute the original content of the thread.  It isn't malice, it is just human nature and it is a generally good thing.

With that background it would seem appropriate to define any topic which discusses a specific repair, electronic topic, theory, coding and the like is "on topic" and to make it easier to access that information later should be kept very close to the original subject.  It is difficult enough to find some obscure bits of information without wading through pages of some interesting side discussion.

All else is "off topic". 

The forum already has many threads that meet this definition of "off topic" so the question is whether to allow more and if there should be any limits.

Both areas should be self moderated (as usually happens on this forum and is one of the great things about it), but that self moderation and any formal moderation would have very different character in the "on topic" and "off topic" areas.  In the "on topic" area it would be reminders to stay on subject, while in the "off topic" area it would be generally focused on civility.  The header or rules for such an area probably should also suggest that since the forum members are in many ways a homogeneous group threads and topics should be chosen with that in mind. 

[AVGresponding]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

Mine is accurate, as is that of everyone I personally know here. Ascribing levels of truthfulness/disclosure to people you don't know is pure and irrelevant speculation.

You really are Mr AVGResponding? Or is that your first name?

Closer than yours is, at a guess. It's fair to say however, that I should have clarified that I was referring to location and gender, more than real name.

[m k]

(should I, or should I not)

First like minded are gathering and later more will come.
Finally the group is big enough to have a sub group of like minded of something else.
This has happened.

Much later the situation can be a web of like minded sub groups with crisscrossing members.
This has not happened.
For reason or another many are also against that kind of evolutional possibility.

A web of sub groups can have a bubble for gladiators and another for origami artists.
If and when gladiators then are beating each others up it's just business as usual but if origami artists are doing the same then that bubble is clearly boiling.
Of course making an origami can be very stressful but then one can join to gladiators and release their stress all day long.
Maintaining that kind of environment successfully is obviously possible only if participants are supporting it.

My off topic here has clearly been very different to what many others have thought.
Here General Technical Chat has actually been pretty much without the technical part.

Opening a truly off topic section will probably initially work since the original group is ready and is a collection of more or less like minded participants.
Later truly off topic becomes a primary reason and it would still be fine if more general posters could outnumber disruptors but finally that wont be the case.
It's also pillaging, despite the ignore functionality.
So that kind of change will finally require much more maintenance.

Community moderation is functional only when community is actually moderating.
This has not happened, what has happened has been something else.
My guess is that before TEA this place has not been a primary environment.
Important yes, but more like a some sort of a mental sanctuary outside of mostly everything else, so secondary at best.
Then TEA turned the thing upside down and community moderation failed.
Gladiator bubble and origami bubble must be moderated differently.

Moderation being actually moderation and not cleaning must be less pragmatic and more personal, not emotional but still personal.
I watched a clip once, it was for racial USA today, sort of.
There black guy shouted "black power" and white guy interrupted his interview and shouted back "white power" and continued his interview with "sorry about that" apology, this happened several times.
What I remember is that the white guy wasn't a racist in any special way, maybe even more like ef you J. Edgar, next time I'll want my lawn mower back.
Since we have only letters we should be much more cautious what can be passed over.

If multi page thread has couple of last pages full of off topics, what should be done?
Tone of off topics is clearly relevant.
Is OP somehow obligated or responsible?
Should a thread be locked when possibly outsiders are doing bad things?
All threads are not irrelevant for everybody.

What are severity levels of moderation actions?
Banning is obviously highest but what's next?
Sensoring is high for some but there are different contents.
Locking is not removing anything but behaving parties may feel differently.
Have I missed or forgotten all moderator splitted threads?

[PlainName]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

Mine is accurate, as is that of everyone I personally know here. Ascribing levels of truthfulness/disclosure to people you don't know is pure and irrelevant speculation.

You really are Mr AVGResponding? Or is that your first name?

Closer than yours is, at a guess. It's fair to say however, that I should have clarified that I was referring to location and gender, more than real name.

Are you, perchance, ascribing a level of truthfulness to my info despite knowing nothing whatsoever about me or that info? Isn't that irrelevant speculation?

[AVGresponding]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

Mine is accurate, as is that of everyone I personally know here. Ascribing levels of truthfulness/disclosure to people you don't know is pure and irrelevant speculation.

You really are Mr AVGResponding? Or is that your first name?

Closer than yours is, at a guess. It's fair to say however, that I should have clarified that I was referring to location and gender, more than real name.

Are you, perchance, ascribing a level of truthfulness to my info despite knowing nothing whatsoever about me or that info? Isn't that irrelevant speculation?

As I said, it's a guess, and informed by how close I happen to know my forum name is to my real one. And yes, it is irrelevant speculation; I was however merely trying to clarify my position to you.

[PlainName]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

Mine is accurate, as is that of everyone I personally know here. Ascribing levels of truthfulness/disclosure to people you don't know is pure and irrelevant speculation.

You really are Mr AVGResponding? Or is that your first name?

Closer than yours is, at a guess. It's fair to say however, that I should have clarified that I was referring to location and gender, more than real name.

Are you, perchance, ascribing a level of truthfulness to my info despite knowing nothing whatsoever about me or that info? Isn't that irrelevant speculation?

As I said, it's a guess, and informed by how close I happen to know my forum name is to my real one. And yes, it is irrelevant speculation; I was however merely trying to clarify my position to you.

I wonder, then, why my informed guess was somehow worth making a song and dance about. The info posted cannot be trusted (a self-evident fact) so what you kicked up a fuss about was merely what the actual true to false ratio is. Pedantically, it doesn't matter: either it is reliable or it is not, and it is clearly not.

Having said that, I would agree that ratio of male to female would still be skewed heavily to male, but I wonder why you could not just point that out instead of trying to make out I was somehow fibbing, simply because your limited experience didn't allow for the possibility.

[AVGresponding]

People's stated gender when registering no doubt bears as much relation to reality as their username or location.

Mine is accurate, as is that of everyone I personally know here. Ascribing levels of truthfulness/disclosure to people you don't know is pure and irrelevant speculation.

You really are Mr AVGResponding? Or is that your first name?

Closer than yours is, at a guess. It's fair to say however, that I should have clarified that I was referring to location and gender, more than real name.

Are you, perchance, ascribing a level of truthfulness to my info despite knowing nothing whatsoever about me or that info? Isn't that irrelevant speculation?

As I said, it's a guess, and informed by how close I happen to know my forum name is to my real one. And yes, it is irrelevant speculation; I was however merely trying to clarify my position to you.

I wonder, then, why my informed guess was somehow worth making a song and dance about. The info posted cannot be trusted (a self-evident fact) so what you kicked up a fuss about was merely what the actual true to false ratio is. Pedantically, it doesn't matter: either it is reliable or it is not, and it is clearly not.

Having said that, I would agree that ratio of male to female would still be skewed heavily to male, but I wonder why you could not just point that out instead of trying to make out I was somehow fibbing, simply because your limited experience didn't allow for the possibility.

I never at any point implied, inferred, or insinuated that you were fibbing. I merely pointed out that all the people I know personally here, are accurately described in terms of gender and location in their profiles.

Unless the people I know are outliers, then it seems likely the general membership is not grossly different.

[pcprogrammer]

All nice and dandy, but it is this kind of "bickering" that f.. ups things. If not done about it start a new thread to fight it out, but lets go back on what this thread is about. And yes I know I started the side note, but also tried to steer it back on course a couple of times.

As to what "m k" wrote, what just happened somewhat proofs his point.

But I feel that it should be possible to have a section where self moderation can keep things in check when it is not made easy for trouble makers to join in. So visible to members only to not attract attention from the outside world, and at least the 50 posts in the electronics section Dave mentioned to get access.

Then this section can house threads like the "Gas Armageddon" that contain tainted off topic posts.

To allow for the different hobbies it can have sub boards like the Computers section.

Lets at least have a proper discussion about that.

[AndyBeez]

btw "Yes" responses are split into two groups.

I would like to suggest a "Teardowns" section under the "Electronics" group; here people post their teardowns and reverse engineered schematics. Just a thought.

[Zeyneb]

If there would be an off-topic interests forum section it would be hard to judge if you should put your post there or in General Technical chat. I don't think the title General Technical chat is valid for the posts you will find there. I believe there is a strong need for social talk about work situations, gas prices and other political and economic influences and moderation is tolerating this already to a certain point.

Also you could have too many sub sections, and in many cases people would prefer to put it in General Technical chat to get the attention. As case in point this thread right here. Officially I would argue Dave should have put it in News/Suggestions/Help but few people are looking there.

So I do believe General Technical chat should be renamed to Community chat, maybe with some post count before members could gain access. And then hobbies and interests outside pure electronics/computers could go into one or more off-topic interests sections. But keep in mind people are looking for a reasonable popular sub section to get sufficient attention.

[PlainName]

But keep in mind people are looking for a reasonable popular sub section to get sufficient attention.

That's a good point, but I would suggest that popularity isn't necessarily desirable for what is a side dish. If someone wants to follow a plumbing rewire (don't know the right term - not a plumber) they would probably hang out in a plumbing offshoot, but they are really here for the electronics. If you need eyeballs then surely a pukka plumbing forum would be a better place to look for them.

[Zeyneb]

But keep in mind people are looking for a reasonable popular sub section to get sufficient attention.

That's a good point, but I would suggest that popularity isn't necessarily desirable for what is a side dish. If someone wants to follow a plumbing rewire (don't know the right term - not a plumber) they would probably hang out in a plumbing offshoot, but they are really here for the electronics. If you need eyeballs then surely a pukka plumbing forum would be a better place to look for them.

Alright, I think that can be addressed by having good section titles and content that match the titles.

[Brumby]

So I do believe General Technical chat should be renamed to Community chat ...

I'm here because the EEVblog follows a core theme that is represented by the first word in its name: Electronics.

As such, any "general" discussions benefit the purpose of the forum if they are directed towards that area of discussion.  Having it titled "General Technical Chat" provides such a framework.  I want people to stop and think about whether their idea for a thread that isn't "technical" is really worth publishing here.  I know I've pulled myself back from starting a few threads because it really wasn't going to benefit anyone who comes here looking for technical engagement.

Changing the title (and, hence the definition) to something less specific is basically saying "we don't care about electronics being the core reason for the EEVblog's existence, so have at it".  The fact that we already have a number of threads that fall outside this framework is one that I would prefer to not get any worse.

[Brumby]

Community moderation is functional only when community is actually moderating.
This has not happened, what has happened has been something else.
My guess is that before TEA this place has not been a primary environment.
Important yes, but more like a some sort of a mental sanctuary outside of mostly everything else, so secondary at best.
Then TEA turned the thing upside down and community moderation failed.
Gladiator bubble and origami bubble must be moderated differently.

Community moderation in the TEA thread failed because there was a failure of a very small section of the membership which refused to acknowledge any wrong doing - and actively went on to justify their actions without regard to the community.

For community moderation to work, each and every member of that community must be prepared to consider their actions may have been inappropriate in the eyes of others - and that if there is a consensus of such, they need to respond accordingly.  This has been happening for quite some time (clumsily on occasions, perhaps) with it being reasonably effective.  Recalcitrant members not only prevent this from happening, but create significant problems along the way.

Could a different tack in Moderation have changed the outcome?  Possibly.  However, it must be made quite clear that there has been very little need for "advanced" moderation skills on the EEVblog since it has been quite well behaved for quite a long time.  The recent kerfuffle was quite unique and escalated quickly.  No-one was prepared for it.

[tautech]

So I do believe General Technical chat should be renamed to Community chat ...

I'm here because the EEVblog follows a core theme that is represented by the first word in its name: Electronics.

As such, any "general" discussions benefit the purpose of the forum if they are directed towards that area of discussion.  Having it titled "General Technical Chat" provides such a framework.  I want people to stop and think about whether their idea for a thread that isn't "technical" is really worth publishing here.  I know I've pulled myself back from starting a few threads because it really wasn't going to benefit anyone who comes here looking for technical engagement.

Changing the title (and, hence the definition) to something less specific is basically saying "we don't care about electronics being the core reason for the EEVblog's existence, so have at it".  The fact that we already have a number of threads that fall outside this framework is one that I would prefer to not get any worse.

It should be clearly pointed out to you that quite recently the what is now General Technical Chat board was previously just General Chat as Dave changed the name of it and added Technical in an effort to get threads to remain ON Topic.
Therefore what Zeyneb is asking for is no more than a return to how things were and not some step into the abyss as you seem to imply.

It even seems from the URL that at one time it was just Chat however that may have been before 2013 when I joined.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/

[wilfred]

Also you could have too many sub sections, and in many cases people would prefer to put it in General Technical chat to get the attention. As case in point this thread right here. Officially I would argue Dave should have put it in News/Suggestions/Help but few people are looking there.

I think you make a good point about this thread News/Suggestions/Help would have been the appropriate place for it. But I don't look in there much at all. I also think too many section and sub sections just feeds the topic nazis. It also fragments the forum and reduces visibility for topic of lesser popularity. The sections heading can't substitute for a database index or search in order to direct attention to items of interest.

So I do believe General Technical chat should be renamed to Community chat, maybe with some post count before members could gain access. And then hobbies and interests outside pure electronics/computers could go into one or more off-topic interests sections. But keep in mind people are looking for a reasonable popular sub section to get sufficient attention.

General Technical Chat was General Chat before the word Technical was inserted. But still you see some very tenuous topics started with flimsy justification as technical. Just for example and I don't object to these threads I mostly ignore them, My DOG just swallowed a 470uF electrolytic cap (SMD type), german silver/nickel silver allergy? ,AI generated imagery getting absurdly good, Post a picture of a cat!, Shipping: Australia to USA and My condolences to my UK and Commonwealth mates.  That's just some visible on the first page. I'm OK with them but are they what adding the word Technical in the board title was meant to weed out? Probably. But they foster a community spirit amongst members, which is good.

Even the contentious topics had their use as a juicier piece of meat for the highly opinionated argumentative members to sink their teeth into. Although that's not an endorsement of them.

[Ed.Kloonk]

The word technical was added for the same reason that most people were quite happy with a choice of just two restrooms.

[pcprogrammer]

To me most of the above arguments validate the existence of a separate section for what does not belong in General Technical Chat, or the rest of the electronics part of the forum.

Sure the argument that people want to start a thread somewhere with a bigger chance on getting spotted is valid, but then community moderation is needed to correct such a situation. And I fear that it is trhere where it will fail. Because of reluctance to cooperate due to thinking nothing wrong is done. Brumby has a strong point there about why the TEA situation failed eventually.

Also thinking that the possible new sections are for getting advice on non electronic related topics is, to my opinion, not correct. To me it is not about getting advice on something, but more a sharing of things I enjoy and others might enjoy that too. If I need advice on something that is not core on this forum I will use google. And when I do need advice on electronics related stuff, google is my first approach also.

I have to augment the above a bit with subjects that concern live advice, like "I'm being harassed by a coworker" can get good advice and maybe not easily found on google.

And the "My DOG just swallowed a 470uF electrolytic cap" brought a lot of humor And laughing is good for you, don't dismiss that.

[EEVblog]

Also thinking that the possible new sections are for getting advice on non electronic related topics is, to my opinion, not correct. To me it is not about getting advice on something, but more a sharing of things I enjoy and others might enjoy that too. If I need advice on something that is not core on this forum I will use google. And when I do need advice on electronics related stuff, google is my first approach also.

That was what my Off-Topic Project section idea was about. It's not about asking questions, it's about sharing other projects you are working on. If people are interested then they can join in and discuss etc.
If not, no worries, it's just a place to share your projects in case it helps or inspires others.

[tggzzz]

Could a different tack in Moderation have changed the outcome?  Possibly.  However, it must be made quite clear that there has been very little need for "advanced" moderation skills on the EEVblog since it has been quite well behaved for quite a long time.  The recent kerfuffle was quite unique and escalated quickly.  No-one was prepared for it.

Agreed.

I'll add a legal maxim: extreme cases make bad laws.

Example: after Dr Harold Shipman's activities (the most prolific serial killer in modern history, with an estimated 250 victims) were discovered, there were calls to regulate doctors so it wouldn't happen again. Such regulation would have been a major overhead for something that was highly unlikely to ever happen again. Fortunately nothing much was changed.