ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Message Board "Vibe"

It's funny how a forum, and a poster, change over time.
My first posts here were more than a little stiff. I won't deny it: I was nervous, and afraid. How would my comments be received? I was also a bit restless with questions that seemed too "basic" to me ... but, as time went by, I began to appreciate the great range covered by the "electrical trade."

I was happy to see that my comments were read, considered ... and sometimes contested!

Having been educated by the same Nuns that taught Joliet Jake and Elwood Blues, my grammar is somewhat formal. Some have mistaken this as pride, and seemed in bliss when given the chance to comment on some of my work . A lot of that went away, once they were sure I was not full of my own importance.

I've appreciated the discussions here. I have had others spot my errors, suggest proper solutions, even suggest things I would never have thought of! I've even had a few code 'details' pointed out that I had forgotten.

Sure, we've had some lively threads recently. For example, a thread about supposed stray voltage got hot when someone referred to the town as a 'hick town' ... our members there were most incensed. (Seems they are 'hillbillies,' not 'hicks,' and there's a big difference to them ). Or when yours truly suggested that it took more than 0.64 questions on a professional exam to make one an electrical expert. (Those who took that particular exam were not amused).(There I go again! ).

On the 'plus' side, the moderators hardly ever have to step in. ECN seems free of the childish antics, flame wars, threats of violence, stuffiness, hair splitting, or self-appointed "house experts" that some other sites seem to foster.

Trust me on this ... the moderators know about those other sites. Having varied interests, they participate - often as simple members - in forums dealing with topics as diverse as old machinery, HVAC, and even cats!

Hope you hang around, NJ. ECN is certainly not a place where everyone has to fit the same mold!

Uh oh...Reno, I think you just jinxed ECN!!
J/K

What could be more constructive then showing where one is wrong by using the code?? Are we supposed to follow the code? I'm amazed at how a few posters on here spew code like its their first language. I also realize I know diddly squat in comparison

I am obviously a 'volume poster' and I am quick to point out a code section.

It's what I do, I realize at times I may come across as harsh even when I do not mean to.

Yes,at times I mean to come down a bit hard when I feel it is needed.

But read what trolldog had to say..




I could not have said it better at all.

I post code section numbers in the hope that people will in fact look at the book themselves.

My posts are only my opinion of the code, everyone should read the section themselves and see what they feel the section means.

I personally dislike when some posts without giving code sections, I find that to be of little help.

Example:

QUESTION:Do I count the neutral as a current carrying conductor?

ANSWER: Yes

Now what help is that?

To me a good answer would include the code section 310.15(B)(4) and some commentary.




[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 03-01-2007).]

You have volume posters, lurkers, and, of course, the village idiot (AKA me) who is often too quick to not point out a violation, but the (sometimes) best solution...

Dynamite, sludge hammer, whatever works.

But that's just me being destructive me.

My posts have changed from "What the heck is that?" (two-year old voice) to "Oh, that's what that does." This forum's definately a good place to learn anything about this trade, that I hope to someday belong to.

For anyone, myself included, I find this to be one of the most professional forums out there.

Ian A.

[This message has been edited by Theelectrikid (edited 03-01-2007).]

I certainly don't think so and I visit everyday.


Message boards in my opinion are like everything else, they change, like everything else.


I notice that too from time to time but I try (keyword is try) to not let it bother me. I think I am one of the heavy volume posters. But that's just because my thirst for knowledge is never ending, and there are alot of good electricians that post here and when I can pick their brains I do it.


True, but you're never going to change people like that so why bother complaining. Just my $0.02.


Obviously not.

Well, I like to lurk 'n' learn here, too- and I must say, Ladies and Gentlemen, that this is one of the most amiable and professional forums that I participate in. And there are hardly any drunk posters with political myopia, too!(hardly any!) Best violation photos, too and where else could you get a blow-by-blow of a Levittown rehab from one of the more interesting members of the next generation(thanks Ian)

This reminds me of a kid in school that was "always first to raise his hand with the correct answer. It was considered an attribute there, and I don't see why it shouldn't be here, as well.
After all, the related Code reference IS the right answer.
As for discussion of WHY it's right, it's been a long time since I've seen anyone post "Because the Code says so", or "Because I'm the inspector and I say so". The constructive discussions take place, but it seems best to have the accepted correct answer first.

I'm right in there with Bob when he says he posts "Code section numbers in the hope that people will in fact look at the book themselves." I've done the same many times, for the same reason, sometimes posting only the related code section number.
You are given tools, it's up to you to use them. (There was always that kid in school too, who looked over others' shoulders to get the answers to the tests, but never learned a darn thing)
We've had members who have wanted to discuss endlessly points that they consider logical and correct, but don't even bother to ever open (or in a couple of cases even own) a reference book.

I feel a lot of luv in this thread.

I've had the NEC 2005 Handbook right here since I joined the site.