Forum Clutter - Students (and others) posting in this forum 5

[human909]

Hi

Maybe it has become worse. Or maybe I'm just getting older. But there seems to be an increasing number of student or very inadequately trained engineers posting in this forum. Occasionally such posts can tangent to useful discussion but most of the time it is just clutter. Kootk posted quite strongly on this topic recently in one of the many threads posted by a student or severely inadequately trained engineer.

IMO the solutions is in our hands. Either;

• REPORT the thread and rely on admin to remove it and/or;
• have a strong direct reply and a strong request that nobody else replies so the thread dies a natural death or;
• do nothing as a fix isn't needed.

At present many of these threads are kept alive but questions and answers that got in circles or by people who add to the replies telling them to post elsewhere. (I perpetuated this today.) I believe content could be improved if we all made a better effort to ignore such threads. The "Truss" thread I initially ignored as I wanted to let it die, then after multiple replies from others I perpetuated it by replying.

Any thoughts? A useful discussion? Or will this thread die quickly....

Personally I think a combination of the first two solutions could readily shut down poor quality threads. The second only works if people listen and agree that the thread is better off dead. I believe it would work a reasonable percentage of the time.

 

[GregLocock]

I’ve done stress analysis for 43 years. The number of 101 level errors I see here by the code following people makes me think a bit of gentle theory based discussion is not out of place.

 

[human909]

Sometimes we get aerospace/automotive/mechanical people responding that seem to miss the mark. But often they can add a different perspective. As @GregLocock has mentioned, us structural folk can be too code focussed

 

[Ron247]

Or the aerospace engineers who somehow feel the need to respond to topics in the structural engineering forum when it is clear that most of the time they shouldn't.

I don't have a problem with other fields involved in these discussions and find their variety of viewpoints helpful many times. I don't mind giving them ideas or advice on structural issues they are trying to address, but I draw the line at wanting an actual final design via ET.

"Use only that which works, and take it from any place you can find it." Lee Jun-fan

 

[IDS]

The number of 101 level errors I see here by the code following people makes me think a bit of gentle theory based discussion is not out of place.

I very much agree. The idea that some posters should be banned because some people think their questions are too elementary is just ridiculous if others think it is worth their time to respond.

Specifically with regard to the pretty girl threads, I have responded to several at length because they are on subjects I am interested in, particularly because different codes have significant differences in the way they treat the problem, often with significant differences in the design outcome. I have often learned something from these discussions.

As for her name being a problem - seriously?

 

[Ron247]

I very much agree. The idea that some posters should be banned because some people think their questions are too elementary is just ridiculous if others think it is worth their time to respond.

I just got through inquiring in another post concerning foundations, about how/why someone analyzes something as they described. It is not that I think they are wrong, but I want to understand the mechanics behind their comments. My questions may sound elementary to some, but that does not change their validity to me. If the response makes sense, I have learned something new. If they don't make sense, it does not mean I think the other person is wrong, but I won't feel comfortable applying the method. It just may not fit my way of working.

Even if the questions and answers go back and forth, it is a discussion, not an argument.

 

[Greenalleycat]

I don't mind someone posting a genuine engineering question that is thought provoking, particularly if they're wanting to understanding engineering principles better themselves
I take a very dim view on:
a) students blatantly posting their homework
b) people blatantly wanting free professional engineering advice
c) people who post potentially interesting situations and give absolutely no information (drawings etc) to work from

I do my best to be rude to the above people on the same philosophy as Koot shares - if we don't define and maintain a set of core principles then I think this forum will lose what makes it so valuable

 

[phamENG]

My biggest pet peeve is the contractors and homeowners asking for free engineering. Okay. That's not. My biggest is when members of the community actually give it to them. A friendly push in the right direction, sure. But just because they ask a specific question doesn't mean it's okay to answer it. I'd even say it can be unethical if they have clearly demonstrated that they don't know what to do with the information they are asking for.

And the problem here, for all our talk about how this is a forum only for professionals...check the policies. There is nothing clearly stating this. Yes, forum members are to "Be professional"...but that's a behavioral comment not an employment status. And I've noticed that, since the forum changed hands, these posts are no longer taken down when I flag them.

 

[KootK]

My biggest is when members of the community actually give it to them.

Yeah... remember when I wasted a month of my life helping a contractor in SE Asia bypass his actual structural engineer on a small concrete building?

And the problem here, for all our talk about how this is a forum only for professionals...check the policies.

I've never actually read the policies front to back. I doubt most members do when they sign up. And I don't consider the reading / remembering of the policies to be a realistic expectation.

I feel that our only realistic option for the enforcement of our social norms is self policing. This is how this was handled in the past. It was easier in the past, however, because a gaggle of our very best had a direct line of communication to Dave right from the beginning. So those guys and gals understood what Dave was going for with the forum and were able to be Dave's beat cops so to speak.

Unfortunately, Dave is gone now and so are many of those beat cops. So the "message" isn't really filtering down to membership as it once did.

The good news is that, if self policing is to be the way, we can manage that without any explicit moderator help to a large degree.

 

[phamENG]

I've never actually read the policies front to back.

You should do it now. Unless you've recently been hit on the head with a large rock, it shouldn't take you more than about 45 seconds. It's 25 lines, most of which have no more than 4 words on them.

My point is, we should add to that list of policies that to be a member posting in a professional forum, you have to be employed as an engineer or in an engineering adjacent position - @RontheRedneck being the perfect example of somebody who, while not an engineer, is a trove of information and practical wisdom for engineered truss design and current practice. And then the Report button can do something. Because right now, it has to be a consensus for this to work, which we all know is unlikely to happen.

 

[EngDM]

3. In the student forum, I see experienced engineers who I think have forgotten what they did and did not know while in college, and shortly upon graduation. It is one of the hardest things about mentoring, accurately remembering what we really were capable of. I do think, we easily remember how motivated and willing we were, and our memory fools us

100% agree with this. The bachelors degree for civil engineering in many cases is too broad. In my experience, I would have much preferred being able to specialize as structural during my degree and learn more about connections, niche case concrete/steel design than about geotechnical wizardry.

I understand that some universities/colleges might allow for this, but I have learned more from this forum/my colleagues than I ever learned in my 5 year undergrad. The education you need to be what is considered a competent engineer would take much longer than 5 years in my case; I guess this is why Canada has an EIT program prior to being able to stamp.

All this to say that I understand that everyone has a starting point, and some questions may seem simple but in reality that base knowledge has to come from somewhere.

That being said, it would be SICK to have a better search function more akin to a search engine whereby it will give you search results based on your keywords that are actually relevant. For example, if you search steel studs in the current search bar, it gives you results for nelson studs (WHY). A better search would make it so much easier to do a pre-search before asking your question.

 

[Ron247]

The bachelors degree for civil engineering in many cases is too broad.

That is one my complaints also. I took as many hours of humanities electives in my BS, than I did structural courses in the CE department. I am not including Statics and Strength of Materials in that statement. But, 2 Structural Analysis, Steel, Concrete and Timber (technical elective) adds to 15 hours. I took 18 hours of Humanities I think.

I really think CE should allow you to not take 2 areas of study in CE and replace it with other courses in the remaining CE areas. For me, it would have been environmental and transportation.

 

[KootK]

You should do it now.

I'm just trying to be honest and pragmatic.

I assume that most folks don't read the policies when they sign up for the same reason that I didn't back in 2001: I was under great pressure to figure out how to design some new thing. I would have said yes to anything short of a credit card subscription (probably would have went for a one time payment).

I imagine that it's similar if you're a homeowner fearing that your roof is caving in, a student trying to figure out a problem on a sample exam before tomorrow's test, or a contractor having to pony up big $$$ for a fix that you don't think needs fixing. For better or worse, our initial attraction is often to the desperate.

I really don't see the policies as being a useful tool to educate new members on expectations here when they first sign up. I do see the policies as being useful to the beat cops here who would like to see the policies enforced (education after the fact). But that, if and only if, something actually happens when offending posts are reported.

But, sure, if we're going to have policies then pro / affiliate status certainly ought to be one of them.

Heck, maybe it should be the only policy. Pretty much everything else falls under the umbrella of "please don't be an ass hat" in my book. And who tends to not familiarize themselves with the policies? Ass hats.

 

[271828]

When I think back, only one irritating thread comes to mind. It was probably about a year ago. Someone posted a question about how to analyze a very simple truss with only two members. Computing the forces would've been a five minute solution for a B- student from a structural analysis class. The OP kept asking questions based on computerized analysis, various boundary conditions, the use of hinged ends, etc. IIRC. People kept responding, as if the discussion was reasonable or helpful in any way. That thread got to dozens of replies and went on for a long time IIRC.

This isn't a cohesive group with an agreement about what to answer, so the solution would've been more vigorous moderation. A moderator needed to step in and say "This is stupid. Solve this using statics and move on."

Edit: I just read the policies also. There's nothing in there that sets a minimum difficulty level for a question, so my second paragraph doesn't help. Oh well.

 

[Ron247]

My point is, we should add to that list of policies that to be a member posting in a professional forum, you have to be employed as an engineer or in an engineering adjacent position

I read the policies just now. They look reasonable as is, provided they are enforced. I do not care much for rules without enforcement. To me, rules without enforcement just affect people who try to do right, not everyone else. The first one says students post in the student section.

I don't see the need to add an employment aspect. Who is going to check it and enforce it? Also, when you say, "a member posting", do you mean asking a question, answering a question or both? I can easily see a non-engineer answering one being worse than asking one.

 

[Ron247]

Someone posted a question about how to analyze a very simple truss with only two members.

I would only been interested in how they modeled a "truss" with 2 members. I see the frustration with the post.

People kept responding, as if the discussion was reasonable or helpful in any way.

I do this myself at times, I keep tabs on a ridiculous post that is useless just to see what logic and advice ensues. At some point, I realize, I am the one with the problem because I keep going back to it and reading it. Then I have to Cold-Turkey before I Wild-Turkey.

 

[Brian Malone]

Threads are self-limiting if no one responds. If you find the subject or the question, in your opinion, to be inane just ignore it and if others feel the same, the thread will die.

 

[271828]

I would only been interested in how they modeled a "truss" with 2 members. I see the frustration with the post.

...Then I have to Cold-Turkey before I Wild-Turkey.

I couldn't find the thread in a quick search. I don't remember the thread name. "Little truss worth five minutes" doesn't yield any results.

The guy (and several who are complaining about clutter in this thread, IIRC. ) were getting wrapped around a tree by what changes if it is modeled as a little frame instead.

Maybe I'll restart the thread. There is a theoretical angle on this that could be useful. Heck, why not clutter up this thread with it?! Here goes: elastic analyses are ridiculously sensitive to small changes in boundary conditions, connection stiffness, and other "unknowable" details of a problem. (Give a fixed support a tiny imposed rotation and see what happens to the moment diagram!) Yet we treat elastic analysis output like it's The Gospel. I have a partial copy of 1964 Lehigh lecture notes on Plastic Analysis. One of the first things it talks about is how deficient elastic analyses are, relative to plastic. We use elastic analysis because it's much easier to computerize, and every engineer has a computer on his/her desk. THAT is why we use elastic analysis. It's rational only relative to efficiency of workflow.

Wild Turkey. LOL

 

[RWW0002]

Threads are self-limiting if no one responds. If you find the subject or the question, in your opinion, to be inane just ignore it and if others feel the same, the thread will die.

While this is true, sometimes the void of minimal response is filled with "bad" advise from other less-experienced engineers (or non-engineers). I think sometimes others then get roped in to set the record straight.. or just because w are all overly fond of arguing and being right and have a hard time letting wrong go unaddressed..

Sometimes I think the best way to get good feedback on a topic is to post a terrible subject line, no sketch, and minimal information, maybe be a bit ornery or argumentative in replys... These threads responses generally get more participation than the ones that have well thought out posts.. weird how that works.

 

[phamENG]

I don't see the need to add an employment aspect.

Are you going to provide free engineering to all the DIY'ers who come asking for it? Do you think any of us should?

Who is going to check it and enforce it?

It's pretty obvious. "I'm trying to remove the wall in the middle of my house. It looks like it's holding up 2 floors and my garage and the illegal unpermitted bridge I built to my neighbor's house last year. Can I just replace it with a 2x8?" We should be able to flag that and remove it. But, because there are no rules against it, the powers that be won't pull it down.

Also, when you say, "a member posting", do you mean asking a question, answering a question or both?

Both. The general ethos that, as @KootK has described, keeps bringing many of us back is the opportunity to discuss technical engineering topics with other engineers - whether it's helping to educate less experienced engineers or to learn from those with more experience - we're here for that back and forth. We're not here for people looking for a free lunch that one of our colleagues would have otherwise been paid to (hopefully) provide, and would have been in a better position to get all of the relevant information to provide a more informed opinion/design.

If the general opinion is that we're going to start doing engineering for free...I'm out.

 

[271828]

It is easy enough for members to ignore invalid threads or questions.

The next question is whether it's OK to poke other members and say "Hey, will you stop feeding this thread?" I have found myself wanting to do that, but feel a bit uncomfortable doing it.