Doing as asked

[JohnW2]

What is the outcome when people never have mistakes corrected?

In the sort of situations we're talking about (e.g. per my examples) there will very rarely be any adverse 'immediate' consequences - but I suspect you may be talking about the 'risk' that the 'mistakes' will eventually come to be regarded as 'correct' terminology/language

However, I wasn't being judgemental - but, rather, trying to be fair-handed in pointing out that winston is not the only one here who feels that 'incorrect terminology' should be corrected whenever it is encountered.

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

Is it a transformer, is it a switch mode PSU - does it really matter if we all know what was meant?

The problem is that many people do not know what happens when an inductive transformer is replaced with a Switched Mode Power Supply.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

To drag this, and the other more recent one, now locked, back on topic, the issue here, and with the other one, is not what Winston wrote, it's the way that the moderators repeatedly shut down any criticism of him which he gets because of what he writes. In the garage lights topic they even removed the post from the OP where he said Winston was wrong, but they made sure to leave Winston's post alone.

They support and protect him, as a matter of site policy, and as you can see from the quoted post on p1 they try to deny this. As I wondered in the other topic, how much evidence is needed before they admit it, and stop?

 

[SUNRAY]

In the sort of situations we're talking about (e.g. per my examples) there will very rarely be any adverse 'immediate' consequences - but I suspect you may be talking about the 'risk' that the 'mistakes' will eventually come to be regarded as 'correct' terminology/language

However, I wasn't being judgemental - but, rather, trying to be fair-handed in pointing out that winston is not the only one here who feels that 'incorrect terminology' should be corrected whenever it is encountered.

Kind Regards, John

On a DIY forum I can see both sides of the discussion regarding accuracy.

If I was asked to source a 12V 50W transformer the last thing I'd be thinking about is a SMPS but if a customer said "blue smoke came out of that transformer" it would be a different matter. Advising someone to "buy a new transformer" could, and probably should, raise the same questions. Edit: I only use transformer as an example as it seems to be a regular topic.

To be honest I'd rather a customer said 'plug socket' than 'that thingy' but incorrect terminology does raise significant confusion and unnecessary expense. I still have a £450 set of lovato contactors in stock for a star delta system which I was asked to replace following an 'engineers' visit when all that was required was the auxiliary contact.

 

[JohnW2]

On a DIY forum I can see both sides of the discussion regarding accuracy. ... If I was asked to source a 12V 50W transformer the last thing I'd be thinking about is a SMPS but if a customer said "blue smoke came out of that transformer" it would be a different matter. Advising someone to "buy a new transformer" could, and probably should, raise the same questions.

Exactly, in the specific case of 'transformers', there is so much confusion and potential uncertainty about the terminology that any mention of it should 'raise questions', in order to clarify what is being talked about.

However, that is one of the few 'inaccuracies of terminology' which does create uncertainties or ambiguities. To quote myself, in the case of things like "low voltage lights", "plug tops", "ring mains", "double-insulated cables", "fused spurs" (referring to an FCU) etc. etc. (or even colloquially, but not appropriately, starting a sentence with "So"!), there is essentially no doubt as to what is meant - so 'correcting people' is purely an educational exercise which is not in any way required for clear and unambiguous communication.

For example, in my opinion, absolutely nothing is achieved, other than confusion (and, theoretically, even potential danger), by trying to 'teach' a DIYer or Joe Public that a 230V lamp/bulb is "low voltage".

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

To quote myself, in the case of things like "low voltage lights", "plug tops", "ring mains", "double-insulated cables", "fused spurs" (referring to an FCU) etc. etc. (or even colloquially, but not appropriately, starting a sentence with "So"!), there is essentially no doubt as to what is meant - so 'correcting people' is purely an educational exercise which is not in any way required for clear and unambiguous communication.

Why do you think educating people is wrong and to be avoided?
That, though, is not the only criterion.
Also important is stopping future incorrect terminology, which may be copied and continued in perpetuity, by others.

What you think are unimportant mistakes is only because of where you draw the line; others draw it in a different place.
There is also the irony that you are trying to correct - educate? - those with whom you disagree.



Someone states "My switch has a red live and black nootril connected to it".
Do you explain that it is not a nootril (using the same spelling because it it obvious what is meant) or do you correct both mistakes - or neither?

Someone states "I have a 13A fuse in my fused spur; is this alright?".
Do you just say yes (assuming details show it is) or do you explain that, although a common occurrence, it is not a fused spur?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

For example, in my opinion, absolutely nothing is achieved, other than confusion (and, theoretically, even potential danger), by trying to 'teach' a DIYer or Joe Public that a 230V lamp/bulb is "low voltage".

More irony?

IMO that is the only one of the examples cited earlier where it does matter, because of the law.

People ought to know that when the law talks about "low voltage" it means what they think of as "mains voltage", not 12V.


But that's not the point.

 

[JohnW2]

Why do you think educating people is wrong and to be avoided?

I don't, not the least because I imagine that I would probably qualify as a 'highly-educated person', and certainly a believer in any type of education (in its right place, and in the right manner).

However, it was not my intention to get involved in an umpteenth re-run of our discussion about that (and I'm sure that neither of us have anything new to say). Rather, this whole thread and, in particular, the comment I made was about 'double standards'. Much as I generally have little time for his 'going on and on' it was suggested that by feeling the need to correct what he regards as incorrect terminology every time he sees it, winston was "one of the reasons (I suspect) that people get scared away from posting here.", and that "Pedantry is risking the entire forum section, and winston1 is the main culprit.".

What I was highlighting was that it seems to be a 'double standard' that results in that being said about winston, but not about others (like yourself) who also feel that incorrect/inaccurate use of terminology should always be 'corrected'.

There's also a question of how the 'education' (if/when one feels that it's needed) is done in a place like this - and it is, in my opinion, particularly inappropriate to do it (as many seem to do - albeit not yourself) by sarcasm (which could well be lost on the person it is directed at). If you look, I quite often do correct people 'as an aside" - e.g. "(by the way, that should be 'neutral', not 'nootril')" or "(for your information, that's what electricians call 'low voltage'/'ring final circuit'/'FCU'/'insulated and sheathed cable'/whatever)" or "I assume you are talking about something which is properly called XYZ". Informing people and 'putting them right' (aka 'education') can be done in a painless and pleasant manner which does not make people feel that they are facing the headmaster, the latter which, as has been suggested, might in some cases perhaps make people hesitant to post anything here.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

I don't, not the least because I imagine that I would probably qualify as a 'highly-educated person', and certainly a believer in any type of education (in its right place, and in the right manner).

Yes, but it is your idea of in its right place, and in the right manner with which others are allowed to disagree.
(Although, below, it turns out that it is not the place that is in question; just the manner)

However, it was not my intention to get involved in an umpteenth re-run of our discussion about that (and I'm sure that neither of us have anything new to say).

Mmm.

Rather, this whole thread and, in particular, the comment I made was about 'double standards'. Much as I generally have little time for his 'going on and on' it was suggested that by feeling the need to correct what he regards as incorrect terminology every time he sees it, winston was "one of the reasons (I suspect) that people get scared away from posting here.", and that "Pedantry is risking the entire forum section, and winston1 is the main culprit.".

That is only true because some of Winston's 'advice' is clearly wrong, yet he persists with it.

What I was highlighting was that it seems to be a 'double standard' that results in that being said about winston, but not about others (like yourself) who also feel that incorrect/inaccurate use of terminology should always be 'corrected'.

If any corrections/advice I give is wrong then I will not mind being corrected myself.
I really do not understand why incorrect terminology would not and should not be corrected.

If someone uses an incorrect term and you just reply using the correct term, how will that someone know what you are talking about?
Honestly, I am not being awkward. I seems so obvious to me that I don't understand why anyone would argue against it.

Example.
"My light switch works upside down. There is a live in Com and neutral in L2."
Is your answer to be:
"Move the switched live to L1." with no explanation, leaving the poster puzzled, or
"Move the wire from L2 to L1." completely ignoring the error and leaving the poster to continue with his mistake.

There's also a question of how the 'education' (if/when one feels that it's needed) is done in a place like this - and it is, in my opinion, particularly inappropriate to do it (as many seem to do - albeit not yourself) by sarcasm (which could well be lost on the person it is directed at). If you look, I quite often do correct people 'as an aside" - e.g. "(by the way, that should be 'neutral', not 'nootril')" or "(for your information, that's what electricians call 'low voltage'/'ring final circuit'/'FCU'/'insulated and sheathed cable'/whatever)" or "I assume you are talking about something which is properly called XYZ". Informing people and 'putting them right' (aka 'education') can be done in a painless and pleasant manner which does not make people feel that they are facing the headmaster, the latter which, as has been suggested, might in some cases perhaps make people hesitant to post anything here.

I completely agree. So, you have been complaining about the wrong thing.
You actually are complaining about people's rudeness; a totally different matter.

Perhaps you can educate them on being polite.

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, but it is your idea of in its right place, and in the right manner with which others are allowed to disagree. (Although, below, it turns out that it is not the place that is in question; just the manner)

Well, in the general case, I think the place may well be relevant. Many on-line forums are such that there is no 'terminology' to worry about, but I don't think people going to such a forum (as a 'leisure activity') expect to have their grammar/spelling/punctuation criticised (provided their meaning is clear - and, if it's not, then clarification should be sought).

I spend most of my working life with people metaphorically 'looking over my shoulder' and taking me to task about anything and everything I write. If I go to a forum as a 'leisure activity', kit is for 'relaxation' and to have a rest from that sort of 'oversight'!

That is only true because some of Winston's 'advice' is clearly wrong, yet he persists with it.

When he's wrong, he's wrong, so that's different. My understanding of the suggestion was that his 'correcting' of incorrect terminology was what might frighten some people into not posting, even when he was correct.

Example.
"My light switch works upside down. There is a live in Com and neutral in L2." Is your answer to be:
"Move the switched live to L1." with no explanation, leaving the poster puzzled, or
"Move the wire from L2 to L1." completely ignoring the error and leaving the poster to continue with his mistake.

That's I situation in which one needs to educate about principles, not just words ... so I would probably go with an augmented version of your second suggestion - something like .... "Move the blue or black wire (which is will be a 'switched live', not a neutral) from L1 to L2" (and might even go on to mention sleeving!

I completely agree. So, you have been complaining about the wrong thing.
You actually are complaining about people's rudeness; a totally different matter. Perhaps you can educate them on being polite.

Well, I certainly don't approve of rudeness, and those who practise it can rarely be educated to be polite. A lot of it is to do with this medium - unless they were boxing champions, I suspect that few of the people who engage in rudeness and criticism here (quite often directed at relative strangers) would do the same if they were in a pub and within arm's reach of the 'victim'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Example.
"My light switch works upside down. There is a live in Com and neutral in L2."
Is your answer to be:
"Move the switched live to L1." with no explanation, leaving the poster puzzled, or
"Move the wire from L2 to L1." completely ignoring the error and leaving the poster to continue with his mistake.

What about

neutral is a live conductor. The line/phase conductor is no more a live conductor than a neutral conductor. This is fundamental in the Definitions.

 

[JohnW2]

I think that's a good example. No matter how 'technically correct' it may be, I can see nothing other than confusion that could possibly result from telling an average DIYer that neutral is a 'live' conductor.

 

[Taylortwocities]

Has anyone wondered why this particular forum has had very few new topics opened recently? It’s not the holidays as other sections seem to be as busy as usual....

 

[JohnW2]

Has anyone wondered why this particular forum has had very few new topics opened recently? It’s not the holidays as other sections seem to be as busy as usual....

Indeed. Mind you, quite a few new topics have been opened recently - but most of them nothing to do with 'Electrics'!

I really do think that all this is very damaging to the forum and, despite all that has been said about 'democracy' and 'freedom of speech' etc., I am surprised that 'Admin' do not seem to feel the need to do anything about it - other than lock or remove threads after they have appeared (and probably largely 'done their damage').

Draconian action is not necessarily needed, at least in the first instance. A requirement (as has been imposed in the past) for moderation/ approval of posts (from a very small number of people), before they became visible (hence potentially damaging to the forum) would presumably suffice. If that were done only for 'a period', and the problem recurred after the end of that period, then they could (maybe should) start 'thinking draconian'.

... just my two-penneth!

Kind Regards, John

==============================
There is currently no mechanism to do that.

Neither is there any point trying to open communication with mods/ admims this way - we may not see it. One of several mods wil just close any "alert" you raise. Please address any comments about the forum to [email protected].
==============================

 

[bernardgreen]

A mailing list I am on screens incoming messages for words and phrases which suggests the message is hostile to a person rather than hostile to that person's opinion.

Mesages considered hostile to a person are returned to the author with the trigger word or phrase highlighted for editing before they are released to the list members.