text:
Encouraging Better Questions: Adding Specific Points to "How to Ask" Box
Our current "How to ask" box reads:

How To Ask
  Is your question about Arduino?
  We prefer questions that can be answered, not just discussed.
  Provide details. Share your research.
  If your question is about this website, ask it on meta instead.
visit the help center »
asking help »

It provides only general guidelines, as does the "asking help" page to which it links. (That page says, e.g., "be specific" without providing much guidance on how to be specific.)
The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition indicates that novices will not be able to well follow general advice and guidelines and instead should be presented with specific things to do; as they increase in expertise they will then be able to start applying more abstract rules and guidelines.
In answering my first couple of dozen questions on this site I've seen some particular recurring patterns with simple fixes, such as poorly formatted code and lack of background information, that made answers more difficult and time-consuming for me. I believe these problems could be mitigated by providing some much more specific direction to novices asking questions. Further, I think that in the course of following this advice novices might be lead to do a bit more research that would make there questions better, though I admit that might be more hopeful thinking than reality.
Should we add more specific advice aimed complete novices and, if so, how should we do it?

You're assuming people read that information. It seems to me that no one ever does...

Oh, I totally feel your pain. (Actually, no I probably don't, really. I would guess I don't feel even 1% of your pain. I don't even know if I understand 1% of your pain.) Nonetheless, I'm willing to do further writing in the (possibly naïve) hope that this might help, if someone who has the power to change these things thinks it's worth the effort. If you think it's not, I'm willing to accept that, too. I've only been around a month or so, so it's hard for me to judge.

I propose we do the following:

Create a "Question Checklist" help page (hopefully with a better name) that provides a list of clear, simple and very specific actions that beginners can take to improve their questions. (See below for my initial go at this.)
Change the "How to ask box" to add, "Review the question checklist page before posting your question and ensure you've fixed all applicable issues."
Change the Asking page in the help center to say, at the top, "Before pressing the post button go through the question checklist page to see if there are any easy improvements from that list you can make. This will increase the chance of your question getting a response."

Here are some things I think should be on the checklist:

Have you been following a guide or other documentation? If so, provide a link to it.
Do you talk about a specific Arduino board? If so, provide a link to a product page for that board.
Do you have a specific device attached to your Arduino, such as a sensor or network interface? If so, provide a link to the datasheet for that device or the chip on it. If you can't find the datasheet, at least provide a link to a product page.
Are you calling code in a library? If so, include a link to the documentation for that library (perhaps one of these, perhaps something from elsewhere).
Have you included code in your post? If so, make sure that it's nicely formatted to be easily readable.
Do you have more than 20 lines of code in your post? If so, remove extra functionality that you can remove that still leaves the problem behind (i.e., the remaining code still demonstrates the problem you're having). Make sure you test your new, smaller code to confirm it still demonstrates the problem.

(The "nicely formatted" item needs improving; we should provide specific direction on how to run it through a code formatter.)

+1 I would add checkpoints about wiring (almost always needed) and powering (when it makes sense).


text:
Editor keeps making unwanted modifications to my answer
I'm not really sure where to ask for moderator help. @ChrisStratton is engaging in an edit war on my answer to Are clone-specific questions on topic for this site? because he doesn't like my (and, presumably, the original poster's) use of the terminology "clone." I've asked him not change my answer in this way, undone his changes several times now, added additional explanation to my answer to indicate to all that I'm using the term "clone" in a way different from what he seems to feel is the only approved way of using it, and asked him to add his own answer or comments if he disagrees with my answer. Unfortunately, he persists in reintroducing his change to my answer.
What should one do in this situation?
[Side note: the rollback history may look a little odd; I didn't understand how rollbacks actually work until just now so I both failed to rollback his original unwanted change (instead changing it back by hand) and did some incorrect rollbacks while finding out that the link rolls back not the commit it's on but to the commit its on.]

What should one do in this situation?

Exactly what you have done. First try and sort it out between yourselves, and when that fails, bring it to our attention here. I have locked the answer so it cannot be edited while it gets sorted out.
I guess this falls under the broader heading of how do we, on this site, define "clone". Personally I try not to use it as the word "clone" but couple it with "cheap Chinese" to specifically indicate a device which tries to look like the real thing but is built with some components replaced with cheaper equivalents (CH340G for example). They are as close to the genuine article for new users to be duped into thinking they have a real one when they don't. Yet by the strictest definition they aren't a clone - a clone is an exact copy.
Much of the time the user asking the question doesn't even know that they have a clone / counterfeit / copy / derivative board - they are just asking about using it or getting it going (9 times out of ten it's a CH340G problem, but since they don't know what that is they're looking in the wrong direction anyway and installing FTDI drivers for some reason...).
The problem with this kind of site is the number of pedants that abound who love to focus on one specific word in an answer that they don't agree with and cause merry hell because of it. It makes them feel important in their small world. The EE site is full of them (which is the main reason I never go there any more).
If the meaning of the answer is clear (as yours is) the exact semantic meaning of specific terms within it is of no importance. Whether you call it a clone, a derivative, or a pile of rancid dog vomit spewed forth by a disreputable fabrication house in the wilds of Malaysia, is of no intrinsic importance.
However, I would say that the editor in question is in the wrong editing your answer like that. Raise his concerns in comments, sure, so you can discuss it and make any changes you both agree with, but acting like a Grammar Nazi? No. Certainly not.

I'm glad to hear that my approach of going with what I think the question is really talking about (including in "clones" what some would call "derivatives") is reasonable. That's not to say I disagree that distinguishing between the two is a reasonable point to raise. So how does this post go about getting unlocked again at some point?

Once you and Chris have come to an agreement on wording (or Chris has eased off a little), which is best done in chat, the answer can be unlocked.

Ok, sounds good. I've created a chat room for discussion of this; I'm not clear on how to invite @ChrisStratton to it, but presumably he'll see this comment.

Look Alterno is correct that the linked site starts with the headline "Building an Arduino on a Breadboard" and is titled "Arduino - Setting up an Arduino on a breadboard" (the title showing on the tab heading for that page).
And indeed the article is about making a breadboard Arduino.
Thanks for the comments in your answer about my article about making a "torch locator" using the Arduino IDE. This wasn't really a breadboard, nor a clone. ;)
I would personally think of a clone as something which is similar to an existing Arduino board (or indeed virtually identical) - hence the word "clone". Something that is pin-compatible I would refer to as Arduino-compatible. And something that uses the IDE and libraries, but has its own hardware design, would be called, ah, I'm not sure. "In the Arduino spirit?" maybe.

As for your actual question, I agree with Majenko. Try to amicably sort it out first, and if that isn't possible flag the answer for moderator attention.

Oh well, from Cambridge Dictionary a clone can be "a computer that operates in a very similar way to the one that it was copied from". Since the keyword here is "operates" and not "looks like" then I will accept your definition. Perhaps you can convince Chris Stratton of that as well.

Keep in mind, the original post states that, "there may be cases where a clone's features, layout, and/or spec deviate from the norm." If you think a clone can't do that, I think you have an issue with the question, not my answer. While I think that other definitions of "clone" are reasonable (perhaps even desirable), I don't think the one the question author uses is so wrong that answers shouldn't follow it.

I have perhaps unwisely commented on parts of the underlying problem that were not part of the meta-question. The question was what to do about an edit war, and I think that was answered.

I've seen a similar situation on another SE site. I think the following posts on SE:Meta may be relevant here:

How to avoid Edit-Wars?
Who has the final authority in an edit war? OP or a moderator?

My personal view is that the main function of tags is to help people to quickly find content on a particular topic. As such, tags should relate directly to the content of the question.
When problems arise, it's generally because the meaning of the tag(s) can be interpreted in different ways. In such cases, I would probably either refine the definitions of the tag(s) to provide clarity, or simply include both tags.
In this case, the dispute is about the interpretation of a word in the text rather than a tag. While this might be used as a search term, that is not its primary function. I'd suggest that if the meaning of the word is thought to be unclear, or might be misinterpreted, just specify how you are defining it in the body of the answer.

The question asks:

However, there may be cases where a clone's [emphasis mine] features, layout, and/or spec deviate from the norm, whether by mistake or by design.
Should this site include questions which relate to specific clones, or would that be off-topic?

When a board has "different specifications" or "different features," it's clearly not a "clone" in the sense of the arduino.cc blog definition because it's not in the category of "exact (or almost exact) replicas of Arduino boards with a different branding."
In fact, having different features, they fall exactly into what that blog post calls, "derivatives":

These are products that are derived from the Arduino hardware design but they innovate either by providing a different layout and features [emphasis mine]  often to better serve a specific market.

So my argument is:

The questioner is clearly talking about what that article calls "derivatives," and not talking about what that article calls "clones."

This is not utterly unreasonable: it's not terrible distortion of the word "clone" to use it in this sense nor is the questioner going far outside the common usage (as far as I know) of this word in the Arduino community.

Thus, it's reasonable to focus on answering his question using the terminology he gives, rather than saying, e.g., a) yes, clones are perfectly fine for discussion here, but b) no, what you call clones are not at all suitable for discussion.

Feel free to disagree/clarify/whatever in comments on this answer or, better yet, post an answer on the original question that you feel addresses your issues with the use of the word "clone."
(Side note: I am totally open to arguments that a) I am not using "clone" in the sense of the questioner, or b) I should not use it in the sense of the questioner.)

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Does a (legitimate) desire to graduate from beta lead to be (excessively) tolerant of poor questions and/or answers?
I'm new (approx 2 months) to the SE community and right now I'm active only in two of its sites: Arduino beta and Electrical Engineering (EE). But I'm already amazed by how opposed the cultures of these two sites are.
EE has a somewhat wack-a-noob attitude and is very unforgiving of users that don't show any research effort or previous work before asking their questions. After reading a lot of posts from EE meta, I think the reason for that seems to be a widespread concern that valuable contributors will fly away out of frustration if the quality bar is lowered, thus making the site worse off. That looks like a legitimate concern for an already stablished site to me, although they sometimes push it too hard.
And then there's the Arduino site, where the concerns seem to be very different from those in EE. After reading Arduino meta, my feeling is (correct me if I'm wrong, please) that the two main concerns here are "graduating from beta" and "attract and being friendly to users that might not have any experience in electronics and/or coding, and who get bashed in EE and/or SO". Both concerns seem perfectly legitimate to me, but do they lead to be excessively tolerant of poor questions/answers?
Maybe this is not the right time to be worrying about valuable contributors flying away out of frustration with poor questions/answers by new users that shot their questions, take their answers and run to never come back once they got what they want (often leaving unaccepted answers behind). Or is it? Is the desire to graduate from beta allowing too many poor questions/answers go through, and ultimately hurting the graduation of the site by silently driving away valuable contributors? What do you think?

It depends on what the aim is of the SE. On Arduino.SE we aim to help anyone interested in developing/discovering Arduino. These people, very often are beginners. Once you go professional on microcontrollers, you'll most likely not use Arduino and even place your questions on EE.SE

I agree with you. However, there are begginers that ask good questions and some that don't (maybe just because they don't plan to be around for too long). Should those two kinds of begginers be treated equal?

As someone who has to respond to flagged questions (for moderation) I can say that I don't personally let a bad question through in the hope that the site comes out of Beta. I don't know exactly what criteria Stack Exchange uses  for graduating a site, but I think there is an element of "does the site look viable?".
The thing is, Arduino is a beginners' platform, although some users such as Petri Häkkinen are highly sophisticated.
I think that EE.SE can be a bit harsh on beginner questions, but perhaps that is the culture that they want, as you observed.
The overall thrust of Stack Exchange in general is to be a helpful site for many disciplines (eg. cooking, aviation, parenting, English) and there must necessarily be different levels of sophistication of questions and answers.
I've done a few "reference questions" personally in the hope that beginners will read those before posting a question that is readily answered already, but that hope is not always met. Perhaps part of being a newbie is that you are also new to the culture of finding answers for yourself.
Meanwhile Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange might legitimately argue that they expect people to ask "engineering level" questions and not 7th year high-school questions. If that is their attitude then I think they are shutting themselves off from helping people who might be capable of learning and contributing in the future (eg. budding electronics enthusiasts) but that is their call.
I also moderate on the Arduino Forum where a lot of the questions are of a similar nature to the ones here, that is, beginner questions. It's the nature of a product that is marketed to schools as an introduction to electronics and microncontrollers.

The problems with Arduino.SE are:

A lot of users that only ask questions (of varying quality)
Most (new) users have little experience with programming/hardware
Embedded Systems experts aren't specifically drawn to the Arduino environment. And can also get around on EE.SE

I think these problems simply wouldn't be there if this would be something like "Embedded Systems SE". That would draw much more professionals, being able to post questions on other hardware as PIC/ARM microcontrollers etc.

But I agree, a lot of questions are not really of high quality. But I'm not sure if "high quality arduino questions" would draw attention of more serious/knowledgable professionals/hobbyists. Since it will still be limited to the scope of Arduino (and thus be focussed on very basic development and deployment).
It may indeed help with people staying around, looking at other questions and even attempt to answer them.
But how can we do this? Should we close every low quality question (possibly have that person create a new question). Can we actually keep up with all the questions? (since there currently are way many more beginners as professionals, that will have to take the time to also moderate). Do we have to start saying: "Read the manual" and vote to close on every question that is at least a little obvious?
Should we even do this? Arduino is a platform aimed at beginners, "Fritzing" is possibly the most used tool for designing Arduino-electronic projects. But if you try posting a Fritzing schematic (or especially board view) on EE.SE, you're going to get shit thrown at you :)
But that's because EE.SE tends to aim at professionals (to keep them there).

Theoretically, I think that "Embedded Systems SE" would've been nicer for both newcomers and experienced people, since it wouldn't have hyped (which is probably also why it didn't get through beta).

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Flagging: "Not an Answer", "Very Low Quality" or something else?
I've had a couple of flags declined which has made me wonder if I fully understand the use of particular flags on Arduino:SE, so I'm going to post this as a question here in the hope of getting some guidance.

Flag: Not An Answer
A little while back, I flagged this answer as Not an Answer since it doesn't appear to make any attempt to answer the question that the OP had actually asked.  The guidance for the flag states:

This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the question. It should possibly be an edit, a comment, another question, or deleted altogether.

In this case - in my opinion - the answer posted makes no attempt to answer the question that was asked. A later (upvoted) comment seems to agree.  Yet the flag was declined:

declined - flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer

Now, the answer in this case doesn't appear to be 'technically inaccurate', or 'wrong'.  It just makes no attempt to answer the question that was asked!
Now, my analogy here would be if I asked how to get from London to Glasgow without using the train, and the reply told me to catch the 12:42 train from Euston.  Yes, it's an answer, it may not be 'technically inaccurate', or 'wrong', but it doesn't make any attempt to answer the question that I actually asked!
So what am I missing?

Flag: Very Low Quality
Today, I flagged this answer for being Very Low Quality because it doesn't appear to be an answer to the question that was asked, although in this case it does attempt to address an 'assumption' mentioned by the OP in that question.
Now, I would say - again in my opinion - that this should have been posted as a comment on the question, rather than as an answer.  However the user that posted the answer doesn't have sufficient rep to post comments.
The actual question is clearly stated both in the title, and in the body of the question, and this makes no attempt to answer it.
My first reaction was to flag it as Not an Answer since the fact that it should be a comment is explicitly given as a reason in the guidance for that flag.  However, given my previous experience I thought I'd play safe and just flag it as Very Low Quality since - again in my opinion - the content problems mean that it also meets the criteria for that flag:

This question has severe formatting or content problems. This question is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.

(Incidentally, the user that posted the answer has since made it clear in the comments that they were addressing the assumption rather than the question)
Again, the flag was declined:

declined - flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer

Once again, the answer doesn't appear to be 'technically inaccurate', or 'wrong'. As before, it just make no attempt to answer the question that was asked!
So, was I wrong to flag this as Very Low Quality?  Should it instead have been flagged as Not an Answer (as my first instinct suggested)?  Or should we not bother flagging answers like this at all?

Clearly I am missing something, and some guidance would be appreciated here.

this answers should be closed by voting. the privilege is awarded at 500 reputation points, so you have it

@Juraj That is for questions.  Vote to delete answers is awarded at 2000 rep.

Flag: Not An Answer
Answers should not be flagged just because they are wrong, or even appear to answer a different question, as in your example. "Not an answer" would be something like "I had this problem too, can you help me?". If it looks like an answer, then it is an answer, or to put it another way not not an answer. Voting answers like this down is the appropriate thing to do, as that reduces workload on the moderators.

Flag: Very Low Quality
This flag is for stuff like "nope, that won't work" or similar short, unpunctuated, unhelpful answers (or complete nonsense). I think this particular answer from your example doesn't really answer the question, but it is presented as an answer, and thus is neither low quality nor "not an answer". Again, voting it down, and/or adding a comment disagreeing with it is the appropriate thing to do.

It costs you a bit of rep to vote answers down (this is to discourage people from whimsically doing that) however you have other tools at your disposal:

Make a comment pointing out, politely, that this answer either won't work or doesn't address the question.
Vote up a better answer, that will put the "bad" answer down the list where people will give it less credit.
Make your own, better, answer. Personally I think that answering it yourself, and showing what a good answer is, with explanations and detail is really helping the site out. Merely pointing out that other answers are bad isn't quite as helpful. Other people will then, hopefully, agree with you and vote you up. Then you get rep points for your fabulous answer. Win win!

Fair enough. Although that does directly contradict the guidance for the NAA flag, which states 'This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the question'. I'll try to use your definitions when flagging in future.

Sounds like there's always going to be a fuzzy area in interpretation of "is or is not an answer" between something like "Is structured as an answer" to "Does not help the person asking". That is, deciding to consider only the structure and not the textual meaning, or to consider the meaning and structure together.

I suppose it depends on whether you focus on "does not answer the question" or "does not answer the question". These have different emphases. My general attitude is "if it looks like an answer, and is at least vaguely related to the question" then it is OK. We have rep voting and vote-to-close for other sorts of answers. If it looks like an answer, and isn't something ridiculous like "to do that, boil the eggs for another 10 minutes" then that isn't really something a moderator needs to look at.

I think that the Very low quality flag puts it into the Low Quality Posts queue, so if there is an answer that shouldn't be there, then that is how it should be flagged. At least, that is the assumption that I've been working under. This flag appears to result in no required moderator intervention Whereas the Not an answer flag does seem to require mod attention, and this attention would not have been necessary, had the answer been instead flagged as Very low quality. But I may be wrong - I was confused about this for quite a few years.

If there is doubt, you could vote to close instead. That lets the general community decide whether they agree with you.

Just another perspective to add to the discussion:
I look at the answer with the thought of another person having a similar issue who has found this page through a search.
Sometimes it does not answer the exact question the OP has asked or has strayed out of the OP's bounds, I think to myself, if I came across this with my similar issue would I find it useful?

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Does Arduino support embedded YouTube videos?
Over on Meta Stack Exchange, I am attempting to compile a complete list of Stack Exchange sites which support YouTube embedding.
Searching on Arduino Meta, I was unable to find any discussion of whether embedded YouTube videos are supported. Because YouTube embedding is not shown in the markdown preview window, there's no way to test without posting publically.
Are embedded YouTube videos supported on Arduino?

There's only one way to find out.
Testing YouTube URL Embedding
Regular https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gocwRvLhDf8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gocwRvLhDf8

Timestamped https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gocwRvLhDf8&t=22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gocwRvLhDf8&t=22

Shortened https://youtu.be/gocwRvLhDf8
https://youtu.be/gocwRvLhDf8

/Embed https://www.youtube.com/embed/gocwRvLhDf8
https://www.youtube.com/embed/gocwRvLhDf8

Embedded HTML <iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gocwRvLhDf8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Mobile https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gocwRvLhDf8
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gocwRvLhDf8

Flash Player https://www.youtube.com/v/gocwRvLhDf8
https://www.youtube.com/v/gocwRvLhDf8

YouTube TV https://www.youtube.com/tv#/watch/video/idle?v=gocwRvLhDf8
https://www.youtube.com/tv#/watch/video/idle?v=gocwRvLhDf8

See Which sites have YouTube embedding on?

What, no RickRoll?


text:
No more project showcases?
I saw that there was a Project Showcase '14 but I could not find other project showcases. I also could not find reasons why it should not be repeated every year.
I really liked the projects from that showcase. Any chance that such an event is repeated?

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Why is it posts are often never fully answered, even when you're trying your best to answer people's questions in the comments?
I mean, it seems like the people who you expect will see you through until you find the answer seem to simply abandon your issue altogether. My recent post on the Arduino site isn't making any progress whatsoever. I need help setting up my Arduino Uno with the port
The same exact thing happened with a Stack Overflow question I had a long time ago. Like, what happens first is they point out how incoherent my explanation is and when I finally elaborate, nobody says a peep. Is there anything I can do so this doesn't happen?

Questions about "why doesn't the serial port appear" are very specific to your setup. For me, for example, I don't have Windows 8 on any computer. I have Windows XP for legacy work and Windows 10 for more modern stuff. I also have OS/X and Ubuntu.
For a USB device to appear, it often needs a device driver installed. It's hard to even start to advise without having your operating system to hand (ie. Windows 8) so I (or others) can take screenshots.
There can be a similar response to questions like "I have the Arduino Micro and the Acme accelerometer, which works in the morning but not the afternoon". To answer that sort of question we have to be able to reproduce it. It's easier to answer programming questions, or hardware questions, because they can be more easily reproduced.

Questions of the style you have posted cannot be answered with a simple "This is your problem, here is the solution". It's a question of troubleshooting.
There are a number of logical steps that we have to walk you through trying and checking different things to rule them out - there's a million and one possible reasons for your specific problem. Only once we have actually identified and cured your problem, which can only really be done in comments or in chat, can we post an answer that has a chance of being tagged as correct.
Any answers that just consist of "Try this and get back to us" are really only comments and not answers and should (IMGO) be converted to comments anyway.

I have set up a community wiki FAQ question with troubleshooting steps:

My Arduino isn't showing up on my computer. What should I do?

Can people contribute to the CW answer in it and improve it? I'm not a windows user, so can't flesh out some of the more complex steps.


text:
What is the procedure for reopening a deleted post?
This question specifically refers to a deleted post https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/77037/receive-flysky-fs-i6x-radio-signals-directly-from-arduino-using-nrf24-lo1-radio
New information has come to light at https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/514618/2-4ghz-radio-transmitter-and-receiver-circuits which may benefit the OP.
I am not sure if the post could be made "on topic", but the information could be useful to people that wish use the Arduino for a remote control subsystem.

The second link you gave doesn't seem to relate to the Arduino. I suggest that the question be asked on Drones and Model Aircraft Stack Exchange.
The question only peripherally involves the Arduino. If it were re-posted here (or undeleted) it would probably get short shrift. Sorry.

Having said that, if the original asker wanted to try, they could post a new question, making it clearer how the Arduino is involved. Bear in mind there are multiples models of Arduino. A more targetted question would do better.


text:
2021 Community Moderator Election Results
Moderator election #3 on Arduino has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the new moderator is:

They will be joining the existing crew shortly — please thank them for volunteering and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!
For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results here or view a summary report online.

thank you to everyone who voted for me

A big congratulations goes out to Juraj. Woohoo!
It is a well deserved win. You already do a lot for this community and now you get the diamond recognition for it. I know that the Arduino community is in very good hands.
Congratulations!

+1 There is too much trash on ARD.SE for one moderator to handle :)


text:
Pinned post in the Arduino forum?
I've been browsing the Arduino forums for years. I have no idea why I find it so fun, but after all this time, I see the same frikin problem over and over with posts!
People never include schematics/drawings! 90% of the questions the OP asks why his code isn't working, and the first 4 comments are "Please post schematics". Most new people don't understand how it's usually quite helpful to have the entire scope of the project laid out for those trying to help.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a pinned post at the top of the forum that outlines how to ask a question? It might save these new users as well as the helpers a little frustration. Or, when creating your first post as so many folks are, there's a template that you are presented with to overview before creating your first post.
Just my thoughts.

The Arduino forum? Or here?

The Arduino Stack Exchange...

There is no such thing as a pinned post on stack exchange. It's not a forum in the traditional sense but a question and answer site.

This isn't a forum, but assuming you are referring to Arduino Stack Exchange, I have a post How to ask a good question for Arduino Stack Exchange. That mentions, amongst other things, posting your code and a schematic (and your error messages!).
I did a similar thing for the Arduino Forum here.
What can I say? People don't read these posts, or if they do they ignore them.
I'll tell you what the problem is. You [1] are in a hurry to get a problem solved. You want an answer and you want it now. You don't have time to read boring lectures about  how to make a good post, you don't have time to post a schematic, or your code, or to tell us what parts you are using. You don't even have time to report what the error messages are, or what the problem actually is.
You just want answers and you hope that with minimal effort you will get them.
I don't want to sound negative, but, hey, if you are planning to ask a question here don't be that person.

[1] Not you personally, AJ_Smoothie.


text:
Is a question involving TinkerCAD (real-time Arduino circuit simulator) off-topic?
TinkerCAD's forum is very limited on how to ask questions (with only pictures). And it looks like questions are replied to weeks later (i.e., low traffic).
I have a pretty simple question about using a slide switch in online simulation and IDE. What do you think?

Really the fact that it's an online simulation is irrelevant. The issue in question was with your code, and it would be the same on a real Arduino (lack of pullup / pulldown resistor on the input, or no INPUT_PULLUP set).
In this situation the question is not really about TinkerCAD - it's about your code or circuit.
However if there was something that worked on a real Arduino but not on TinkerCAD, you'd certainly be better asking about it at TinkerCAD.

Should I delete my answer? It's at -1 still.


text:
Add all board types to the Arduino Stack Exchange site as tags
I often have questions about the MKR GSM 1400 which I post on the Arduino Stack Exchange site. But unfortunately the closest tag for this is the MKR1000. Which is pretty similar, but not the same at all. The MKR1000 fetches data over Wi-Fi whereas the MKR1400 has a built in SIM module. So I wanted to ask if would be possible to add all the different Arduino products as tags to that Stack Exchange site?
The board types can be found here: https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/Products

Privilege "create tags" is awarded at: 150 reputation.
https://arduino.stackexchange.com/help/privileges

Do you have enough reputation?

I added the mkr-gsm-1400 tag. You can assign it to your questions now.

Juraj's answer has explained about the "create tags" privilege and created mkr-gsm-1400 tag.
But to answer your question,

would [it] be possible to add all the different Arduino products as tags to that Stack Exchange site?

Not really, tags can be only be created when there are questions to assign. The Stack Exchange system doesn't allow anyone to create tags for non-existent questions, and those unassigned tags will be considered as "orphaned" and will be cleaned up daily.
Also, tags that have exactly one question are automatically pruned after six months, unless it has tag wiki.
That said, please consider to also complete the tag excerpt and tag wiki for this tag to save this tag!


text:
Trouble with posting code correctly
Why is it that the code I have posted appears jumbled up but looks normal when inserted between brackets?

You need at least 4 spaces (not tabs!) to precede every single line. Additional spaces will indent those lines. https://arduino.stackexchange.com/editing-help#code

"enter code here" is where I pasted my original code and it was fine. In subsequent edits (re-pasting) has left a mess. Before saving the edit, the code looks fine whilst scrolling but appears below very jumbled and when saved shows as jumbled. Must spaces be added manually to each line of code?

Select all the code and then hit Ctrl+K (think of K as in Kode). (Ctrl+C has already been used for "Copy"). That puts 4 spaces before each line. If you do it a second time it takes the 4 spaces away.

Thanks for all the help, I very much appreciate it! :)

Format your code in the Arduino IDE (or in whatever code-entry editor you are using). In the Arduino IDE, it's the 'Tools | Autoformat' menu item.
Copy/paste your code into Arduino Stack Exchange's question or answer text-entry box. (If you're trying to show code in a comment, forget about formatting. Comment boxes strip all the indenting and newlines out of it. The best you can do in a comment is enclose it in back-ticks: `` to give it a gray background).
Select the entire block of code and click the '{}' symbol in the text-entry box's header. That will indent your code so the site will recognize it as code and keep its formatting.

Sorry for my noob issues, I have it now!

No problem - I know this from having tried do by hand, what the site could do for me.


text:
Request to create the arduino-create tag
I've never requested a new tag before.
I have a question about the Arduino Create site but there's no tag for it yet.
It would be great if a tag like arduino-create or create could be made for questions about the site and how to use it.

done............


text:
What does "bumped to the homepage" mean?
I frequently see this, on older questions. Where do they end up?  If I add anything to them, is the OP likely to see it?
EDIT - okay, so it ends up at the top page in that 'forum' area, looking like an active question, but is not really.

See also: What can cause a question to be bumped?

It will be bumped by "Community" which means an automated process. It is intended to bring questions with zero-score answers only back to the attention of everyone for further investigation. This does not apply to questions with negative scores.
See What can cause a question to be bumped?

is the OP likely to see it?

Possibly not. I've seen quite old questions bumped, and the OP may have moved on. They will probably get an email notification however. Still, questions here are not just for the OP, and if you can give a good answer it may help someone else in the future.

Thank you Nick.

The flaw in this is that, without an answer having accepted by the OP (who may have abandoned it), the question is assumed to be unsolved. These questions seem to go on getting bumped back to the top every so often, forever.

You can always up-vote the answer(s) if it/they appears to be a good attempt to answer the question. In particular, if the OP doesn't say "that didn't work" you might default to assuming it worked.


text:
Declined moderator flag
While another similar question was recently asked here on Arduino meta, I have a slightly different issue of declined flags, so I am starting a new question.
I reviewed a first post, in this case the only flagging option available was "moderator attention needed" instead of the usual list.  Since this was the only option, I flagged and got the following decline:

Of course, having reviewed a large number of posts I am familiar with the standard flag options.
Can anyone explain why the usual set of flag options were not available?  Perhaps, by the time I reviewed the post it had already received so many downvotes that this is an automatic feature on Arduino SE?

I have no idea why it was only showing one option. It should have had "Spam - Exists only to promote a product or service, does not disclose the author's affiliation." as the first option in the list.  Choosing this option automatically (after something like 6 flags) deletes the question.
Maybe you were too late and it was already flagged enough times as spam and was actually deleted already.  Spam disappears almost immediately it arrives on these sites. In general, by the time you see it, it's already gone. If it hasn't, then the option of flagging as spam should be there.
If it isn't there, then I would guess you don't need to flag it - you're too late to make any difference.
Note: We don't usually need to delete spam. The system does it for us. By telling us manually about spam by flagging it for our attention (even though it may have not given you any other options?) it's just causing us more work that we don't need.
If you have a problem with how the system itself works then you should raise a question on meta.stackexchange.com as we here have no control over (nor much knowledge of) how the system works internally. We just moderate.

I don't yet have enough rep yet to close / vote to close posts, therefore I have not seen much of that part of the SE.  This particular "question" was in the review queue, so not that old.  It's good to have the explanation about spam.

@MichaelT "Maybe you were too late and it was already flagged enough times as spam and was actually deleted already." I believe this is the reason. Deleted posts only show a sole "mod flag". So if you encounter this, consider refreshing the page to check the post status.

There is a "smoke detector" bot which informs subscribed users when it thinks it detects a spam post. They don't have to be moderators. Enough users who react to such messages are likely to cause the spam to be flagged, and then deleted, almost immediately.


text:
What tags have syntax highlighting enabled?
As per How do we get syntax highlighting?, only the programming tag has the feature enabled.
But I'm seeing that the tag arduino-uno also is highlighting the code, for example this question.
Are there more tags out there that have syntax highlighting? I edited a couple of questions to add the programming tag but maybe sometimes it won't be necessary and it's a cool feature that all answers follow the question highlight.

I think the C++ tag also has it enabled.

The short answer to your question is to use this syntax: <!-- language-all: lang-cpp --> right above the first block of code.
Here is an example of a question with the syntax highlighting "not working".

Paste in the "html style" syntax as specified in the next image.

Add 4 spaces.

Give it a few seconds, then the highlighting should start working.

Using this method, all of the following code "blocks" will be treated as C++.
The long answer to your question is here: How Do I format my Code Blocks.

I was wondering specifically about the tags on the main site that provide syntax highlighting. Does using the HTML language syntax on the Question automatically enables it on Answers? Because that's what I think it's the cool feature of it being associated with a tag, any post on that question will have it enabled.

More to the point, can moderators see the list of tags with an associated syntax highlighting?

I'm not sure if tags on the main site provide syntax highlighting. Time for me to do some testing. Here is a question with no highlighting: https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/30312/high-rate-of-transmission-errors-50-using-xbee-radio. Let's see what happens if I add the C++ tag...

It worked :) Keep in mind, there is a limit of 5 tags per question, so if there are 4 or less existing tags, adding the C++ tag fixes the syntax highlighting issue for a question with one block of code (I haven't tested it with multiple code blocks yet). If there were already 5 tags set, which one do you "remove" to add the C++ tag to make the syntax highlighting work? You don't remove any of them, just add the HTML type syntax I've shown you in my answer, and it will apply C++ syntax highlighting to every block of code in the question.

Adding the C++ tag to a question will not automatically highlight all the code in every answer. As far as what moderator can and can not see, I am not at liberty to say, but I am confident saying I have never seen any tool, or page, or anything else that gives me a list of tags with their associated syntax highlighting. People often mix C++, Python, HTML, Processing, etc, code in their question/answers, so applying syntax highlighting based on one language is not always desirable.


text:
An straight answer or just guidance?
"This is not a free code service."
"Do your own research/coding!"
"Have you ever tried googling this?"
This are the response users might get for some questions, I'm a user of this sub for some time now and I know some users don't even bother (or don't know how to give a proper explanation because English is not their first language) to ask the question clearly and/or they just paste some code/error.
Three month ago I didn't know anything about Arduino and C++ in general, now I have a medium knowledge to do my own projects.(Thanks to Majenko, Chris, Michel, Juraj and everyone else in this sub.)
I was looking at my questions today and those questions which answered with a working example in it helped me more to understand the coding principle about that specific question in details, for example This question. (I can't appreciate enough the time and effort chris put on answering that question.)
So i can not disagree more with this:

If you give 'them' an straight answer they will never learn anything. they have to do their own research.

If I didn't have a piece of working code I could never be able to "play" with the code and learn how it works...
I mean no one is getting paid to answer questions here, therefore there is no pressure to answer any question.
Even though I know just a little about Arduino yet sometimes I do have an answer for some simple questions but since I don't like the feeling of getting a down vote I don't post the answer and just comment the answer. Example.

http://slash7.com/2006/12/22/vampires/

@Juraj what she (I'm sure she also disagrees with "open borders") describes in that "article" is not gonna happen here because like Majenko answer not everyone are willing to help the "vampires" they are individuals who just seeking help. they choose SE over other free services like reddit, google etc (isn't that what most companies want?). my point is please don't down-vote the person who is willing to help the "vampires" it's his choice...

Personally I am strongly opposed to people answering in a comment under the question. This totally goes against the design of Stack Exchange. The comments under questions are supposed to be to clarify the question, to get more information, like what board they are using, and what the hardware being connected is, exactly.
See Help Center > Privileges > comment everywhere

When shouldn't I comment?
Comments are not recommended for any of the following:
...
Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one);

As that post says, comments are temporary. So, your "comment answer" might go away, thus depriving future people of the benefit of your wisdom. Also, you lose the chance to get reputation when people vote your answer up.
And, comments tend to be sequenced in upvotes-for-the-comment order, which can make them look like nonsense when read later on.
The whole design is for people to make answers (not comments) so that the answers can be voted on, and then future people can choose, if they wish, the highest-voted answer.
You are losing the chance to gain rep if you are timid about posting answers. Say "to hell with it" and post your answer. Maybe some will be voted down, but in most cases the up-votes will compensate.

As for "do your own research" ... pffft! We are supposed to be answering questions here, not doing passive-aggressive "find out for yourself" answers.
When I see a question I answer it. If it looks like a homework question I would post a partial answer and say something like "I'll let you handle the other inputs yourself, based on my examples".

"Personally I am strongly opposed to people answering in a comment under the question." The unwritten policy of "Don't give them an straight answer" might prevent new users to provide an answer and if they do give an answer they'll do it in comment section to avoid getting down-votes. I'm glad one of the oldest member of this sub agrees with me about not having a "rule" like this. thank you.

I see two kinds of question that fit into this category:

I want to do this. Give me the code and circuit.

No. I won't. I'm not going to spend my time and effort writing your software and designing your circuit for no reward. Zero effort has been shown by the OP, so zero effort will be given by me/us.

I am trying to do this, but I don't know how to begin.

By all means we'll help you begin. If you have examples that you need us to help you understand, that's fine. If you need help understanding the datasheet, that's fine. As long as you've taken that first step of at least looking at an example and trying to understand it, then we'll help you.
In short: "Give me code" - no. "Help me understand" - yes.
Fortunately for you your questions fit into the second category, not the first. So you generally get our help.

"I want to do this. Give me the code and circuit. 'No. I won't.' ". That's ok it's a free service and you choose to answer the questions you like. but what if someone wants to write the code for the guy? can we not hammer (down-vote) the person which is not seeking a "reward"?

@newbie if we breed the expectation that this is a free code writing service then people will get upset when they don't get help when the one guy doing the code writing doesn't want to handle their question.

@ratchetfreak they'll get "upset" anyway, I'm not saying we sit there and write free code for the people. what I'm saying is there's no need to down vote an answer which is from someone who willingly wrote a free code.


text:
Edits not being approved/rejected for quite some time
I haven't been able to edit questions for a few weeks because "[I] have too many pending edits. Further edits cannot be submitted until prior edits have been approved".
Has nobody been accepting/rejecting edits lately or am I otherwise stuck? Can this be remedied?

There was a bit of a backlog, yes. I guess the community members haven't been doing their duty (or not enough of them anyway as it takes a few votes normally for each edit).
I've cleared the queue.


text:
My Answer was Merged with the comments
Today my answer was converted into a comment I do not know the reason why our moderator has changed my answer to the comment. The link to my answer is here. I still do not understand why it was deleted and merged with comments any light to it would be grateful so that if it's a mistake then I don't repeat it.
Thanks and Regards,
Maaz

That question was about compilation error which was solved by answer recommending to use .c_str().
The update turned the question into a troubleshooting case, which is not possible on a Q&A site. Sometimes we help troubleshot but not in answers but in comments. Your 'answer' is such a comment. If it takes many comments, then the session is moved to chat, which is more suitable because it can show source code.
If OP answers your comment, I will move the comments session to chat and you can do the troubleshooting there. But the question was asked 1 year, 4 months ago so I doubt OP still tries to solve this.
Note: strdup allocates string on heap

Yeah, later I checked when the question was asked. Thank you for the clarification

Simply because an answer asking the OP to try something is not an answer - it is one of a stream of comments.
If you want clarification or for the OP to try something out and get back to you then you ask that in comments. Once the cause and solution has been "nailed" in the comments you can flesh that out into a proper answer.

Can you please let me know the full form of OP also. Thank you

@MaazSk Original Poster. The person asking the question.

Okay, Thank you!


text:
Searching for proper SE site or others forum for the < finding Arduino alternative for IRIG2 cable > question
I am trying to split my work to some small parts and ask some question about them o the Internet, for example I have tried to find some Arduino project for playing YouTube music on clubhouse form PC as you can see below:
About playing YouTube audio from my computer into Clubhouse (hack and DIY) [closed]
So I have asked it on the electronic SE site and the lifehack SE site and the Arduino SE site, and it has been recognized as Off topic question!, now If possible I like to find out some alternative Forum like SE or other SE site to ask this question.
Thanks.

Your problem seems to be that this is not an open discussion forum. This is a question and answer site. You come with a specific problem and ask a specific question, and we answer it. Instead you seem to be asking general advice and "how to proceed" kind of questions that invite long-winded discussion.
Maybe the Arduino Project Discussion forum (https://forum.arduino.cc/c/projects/7) would be better for you.


text:
New site design launched
As you can see, the new site design just went live! At this point, we are done with major revisions to the design (although you can still report CSS/styling bugs by starting a new post and tagging it with site-design and bug). Thank you for your valuable design feedback.
I have enjoyed working with you to create this theme. Thank you for being engaged in the process, and I hope you enjoy the new design!

I browse pages of the site to enjoy the new design. :-). thank you.

I very like the light teal for visited links

Really appreciate your words @Juraj. I'm glad you like it :)

Very nice, thank you @paintedbicycle! Thank you for your efforts.

3 LEDs at the very bottom of pages

even the 404 page is customized :-)

Cool! Amazing attention to detail!


text:
How a question related to modules connected to Arduino and programmed with ArduinoIDE to achieve a technical spec can be offtopic?
I'm doing an Arduino based project but I'm struggling to achieve a long range with RF communication, searching ended up to many questions related to long range communication with a problem analogous to mine but different requirements so I have asked this question
My question has been instantly downvoted and a bandwagon effect followed and someone blamed the question as offtopic and closed with the motivation that "same kind of modules could be used also with something different than Arduino, so Arduino is not relevant".
Maybe it is my opinion that problems like the one of question I have asked, may be useful also to other Arduino users that have to deal with remote controlling and long range communication but sure if applies the rule "if the modules you are dealing with Arduino could be used regardless Arduino the question should be closed" an humongous number of questions as a matter of fact should be cleared (basically the most related to modules and sensors without a specific ino code sketch attached) with a negative effect for this stackexchange section.
Certainly I don't

Feel free to ask about anything related to Arduino.

as stated in guideline.
I frequent many different stackexchange websites related to different tech and science areas and I have the growing impression stackexchange areas related to arduino and electronic seems too much prone to hostile attitude toward questions, and probably is not a coincidence these communities don't grow well as other Stackexchange areas despite the relevance of the respective community topics.
Maybe guidelines that avoid certain ambiguities would either tame "compulsive downvote shooters" or preventing "victims" to waste time asking here.

You question is not above interacting Arduino with a module. You seek recommendation about long range RF communication technology.

It was about RF modules to use with arduino not about RF theory. There are many questions of same type as said. What is the difference with this question? https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/44326/very-long-range-wireless-communication-between-two-arduinos500-1000-km or this https://hackaday.com/2014/12/19/gibson-girl-emergency-beacon-built-from-a-wind-up-flashlight/ or https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/67281/increasing-distance-of-ir-remote-transmitter and many many question of this kind  not even mentioning those relates to other kind of tasks?

questions in the 'gray zone'. the community answers some and closes others.

There is a distinction between "I have this module and I can't get it to work with my Arduino" and "What technology would fulfill these requirements?"
This site is geared towards answering specific technical questions, not discussing the pros and cons of different technologies or products.
Your question amounts to little more than a shopping question (asking for recommendations of products), and as such is for this site. This is not specifically an Arduino policy but a general policy across all (or most) of the technology related exchanges.
In short: if your question is related to Arduino and has a specific "this is what is wrong" answer it is on topic. If an answer is little more than the opinions of people then it really isn't on topic.


text:
Are questions about all AVR microcontrollers considered to be on-topic on Arduino SE?
I have seen questions about ATtiny microcontrollers on the site without anyone objecting. I was wondering where the line between what's on or off topic here is. As I understand it is possible to program a lot of microcontrollers with Arduino IDE even using Arduino boards as programmers. Help Center indicates:

On topic:
Specific questions about Arduino boards, code, and the Arduino IDE. Feel free to ask about anything related to Arduino. ...

Would it be correct to assume that questions about everything and anything that can be programmed with Arduino IDE would be considered on-topic here? If not, where is the line? Are tinyAVR controller questions still officially OK?
I would like to clarify:
I think I kind of get the idea about the programming part a bit better. I am more interested to find out about questions related to ATtiny controllers and programming functions specific to them(more about the electronic side so to speak, than the programming language, that is clearly better suited for Stack Overflow). If at the same time I can ask a more general question about all AVRs and other controllers programmable with Arduino software that is perhaps more useful to the community - even better, but ATtinies are my main interest. Is it OK to ask specific questions about them here even though they might not be that relevant to actual Arduino boards using ATmega chips?

If we turn it around, what is not? If it's an Atmega328 (not Arduino Board), programmed w/o Arduino IDE, w/o Arduino libraries, it's not. In any other case, if the question is somewhat related of the "Arduino side", it's fine to me.

Say I program ATtiny84A, I use Arduino IDE, libraries and all that stuff, but I happen to be interested in for example high voltage programming and setting fuse bits to lets say turn the resset pin into input pin(just an example), that is not really that relevant to Arduino boards maybe, what then?..

@Paul,do you think it is OK to consider ATtiny controllers as Arduino-like controllers and therefore questions about them to be on-topic on Arduino SE?

if you're programming it with Arduino language, and the question is about Arduino language, it's fine. If you're uploading the code with Arduino IDE and the question is about Arduino IDE, it's fine. If the question is about ATTiny84 and not related to Arduino IDE or Libraries/Code, it may fit better on electronics stackexchange. (I kind off miss the Embedded Systems Stack Exchange, would be perfect)

Yes, it's fuzzy. "Related to Arduino" could easily be considered to be something using the same processor as one of the many Arduinos.
There is a school of thought that the Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange is a more appropriate place to ask general questions about the AVR processors, and there certainly are some knowledgeable people there. This would be especially so if such a question has a related complex electronics component.

Are tinyAVR controller questions still officially OK?

I don't see any problem with that. You can program them with the IDE.

As a moderator here, I wouldn't be closing questions just because they involve tinyAVR processors, or any of the Atmel ones, really. You might be better off asking complex questions which don't really involve the Arduino IDE in any way on Electronics SE* however there is no requirement to do so.
That site also has quite a few questions directly about the Arduino. Some of them get migrated over here, many do not. There is a bit of cross-pollination between the two sites.

* Electronics SE and Electrical Engineering SE are the same thing.

Thank you. I think this answers my question as much as it is possible.

It seems to be a fuzzy line separating that. Observation seems to reveal that anything that is or can be programmed with the Arduino IDE, or more specifically, the "Arduino API" (for lack of a better term; meaning the device setup registers, Port I/O and similar actions are abstracted away from the coder) is acceptable.
However, questions that an Arduino user (that is often a relative newcomer to C/C++ and/or embedded device programming) might ask, but which are merely questions about the programming language/structure and do not touch on an aspect of embedded computing or Arduino and Arduino-like platforms are closed as off-topic.
There are some who advocate that even pure programming questions are acceptable as long as the user is in the realm of working on Arduino and its friends, but it would seem that those kind of questions have no problem getting the required number of close votes.

I wrote a response to this answer in a comment, but then decided to move to the question as it probably clarifies it a bit. Please see the updated question.

There are boards like the DigiSpark which are part of the unofficial arduino-like family, with board definitions in the Arduino IDE, and which use ATTiny chips. I would not see that ATTiny vs ATMega makes much difference to the relevance of a question here, all else being equal.

Thank you. That is what I want to know. I guess there is nothing very different about ATtiny controllers when they are off those boards and programmed with an Arduino as ISP, so I assume they could be called as you nicely put it - Arduino-like family.


text:
2021 Moderator Election Q&A – Question Collection

The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it here.

Arduino Stack Exchange is scheduled for an election next week, 2021-07-09. In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation.  Participation is completely voluntary.
Here’s how it’ll work:

Until the nomination phase, (so, until 2021-06-28 at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post one question per answer.

If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of [text](link), as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.

This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into currently.

We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The following two questions are guaranteed to be included:

How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?

The community team may also include the following three questions if the community doesn’t supply enough questions.

In your opinion, what do moderators do?
A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. We exclude any suggested questions that are negatively scored.

We will post the final questionnaire on the Election page. Candidates will have the option to fill out the questionnaire, and their answers will appear beneath their intro statements.
This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&A.

If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.


text:
What if a comment solve the question?
Good days all!
I am new to this forum, and I am trying lo learn how the "rules" here.
After reading several post, such as  this, this, and this, I can assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you can use comment to ask for clarification without intention (yet) to answer the question.
What if instead of asking for clarrification, the comment is solved the problem? like this question, it turns out the "error" was the method OP used to observe wether his Arduino works or not, and the OP himself confirm that the problem is solved on comment section. My first thought is "Oh great, it solved. Nothing to do here.", but the question still comes up in the "unanswered" section. Well, nothing is wrong with it but it's make me itch. The accepted answers here, also does not cover about it.
So, what comes in my mind is turn my comment into an answer. (I've mentioned that I'm trying to learn how the "rules", right?) Is it appropriate to ask for accepting an answer?

Stack Exchange considers comments to be ephemeral - that is, they may be deleted. Thus an "answer" which is just a comment is ultimately not helpful. However initially you may make a comment to test the waters, and then if the OP acknowledges that this is the correct answer, we now have this problem that you mention. I suggest:

If you are the one who made the comment which answered the question, turn it into an answer (ie. copy/paste, or retype with extra detail). Perhaps underneath the question make a further comment that you have now answered it "officially" and hint that the OP could accept the answer.
If you are not the "owner" of the answer, make a comment asking the person who commented to turn it into an answer. You can use the @name syntax to get them "pinged" to notice the comment.
If this doesn't achieve anything (after, say, a few days) turn the comment into an answer yourself, giving attribution to the person who made the comment. (eg. "As Joe Bloggs said in his comment ..."). I have an example of doing that here. In that particular case the OP also answered the question. This behaviour is OK - you are allowed to answer your own questions.

References
See:

How should I handle questions which are answered in the comments?
What should be done with questions that have been self-resolved as a comment instead of an answer?

We discussed this on meta.serverfault a short while ago and decided that you should Steal comments that answer the question and post them as an answer. You can always tick the Community Wiki box if you're not comfortable rep whoring.

Also see this answer:

Answer-comments should be reposted as answers — but this is no excuse for plagiarism

In other words, don't try to pass the answer off as your own, if you didn't write it.

At another StackExchange metas you can see a tip: if you can post an answer after reading some comments, do it. Because every correct question need a correct answer, not only useful comments.
So if it is your own question and comment helps you to solve the problem, invite its author to post it as answer.


text:
Somewhat helpful but still spammy user - Not sure what to do about it
This user just awakened an ancient thread on EE.SE simply to promote his own article. He tried to make it look like it was not his article - obvious spam, nothing to see, please move along.
Now, I don't take kindly to spammers, so I checked his account here on Arduino.SE, and.. it's complicated.
Every post but two has a link to his personal website, often without further comment and almost never even hinting that he wrote them. He also doesn't mention the answers, but forces people to click through. So far, so bad.
What's problematic is that the information in the link may very well be good answers to the questions, sometimes the only answer. I'm not sure what to make of this. I don't want to flag all the posts as spam. Maybe a stern warning from a moderator is in order?
I know too little about the culture here at Arduino.SE, but I feel that something is not right with those posts.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention! I have a quick question: how do you know that these are his articles that he is linking to? Most of them should be removed anyway as they are "link only answers," but I can't see anything to prove that the sites that he links to are his own. (Please reply to me using @Anonymous somewhere in your message so I'll get a notification that you replied to me.)

At the bottom of one of the linked pages (at least) are the words by the author: "I am Syed Zain Nasir". So, he is self-identifying as the author on the target site. It isn't as obvious on the SE posts he is linking to his own pages. Personally I usually say "my page ..." rather than "see this page" to make it clear I am referencing my own work.

@AnonymousPenguin Indeed, what Nick Gammon says, all the articles he links to has "By Syed Zain Nasir" in the top bar, and they end with "I am Syed Zain Nasir, the founder of The Engineering Projects (TEP)."

I think we might just comment on his answers and mention he should provide more details. Putting links (even to one's own posts) does not seem bad too me, as long as the articles are related to the question (obviously!) AND the content of the linked article is put back (in part, only the relevant stuff) into the answer. Adding a claim that the answerer is also the poster of the linked article might be welcome too, but not mandatory from my viewpoint.


text:
Documentation for Arduino SE
Here is a question that is already asked with a similar intension. But i am trying to be more specific.
Let me explain how my question is different. Even-though they are towards the same goal, the linked question seems to be very generic and would invite a wide spectrum of answers. This question explains why we need a documentation for arduino, with example.
FAQ is of course the best thing for beginners. but looking at the bigger picture, just like we have documentation for C#, which is indeed helpful because it is more understandable and generic than the QAs.
The number of questions unnecessarily increase(Not an issue..) if people don't find the exact question(even-though people find similar ones).
just like how i need to ask this question.
Consider a situation where i need to interface some new module to my arduino, i am looking into Arduino SE and find find questions that are related. like "How to connect my XX module?", "I have tried this code to interface XX module but is not working" etc. but, a beginner would be more interested in a more descriptive document which would help him do his job from the beginning, till the end.
hope i am making some sense.

+1 You pretty much got it! This is really why I find it great if specific SEs such as Arduino, Pi, (cooking?!?)..... should get documentation. Though we might get more "useless" questions, making some stuff clear is very important. There are really not enough good tutorial out there that can cover many because they are often made by a person or a small group. If all of this community would work togheter to write some great documentation for the Arduino an many popular sensors/modules. It would be very helpful for everybody else

Also, we frequently get questions about error messages. If we could make a documentation about all of the possible error messages out there, it could really help many users (including me!).

Possible duplicate of Should Arduino SE get a documentation section?

We could set up a meta page with a list of common errors/questions/etc.

@AnonymousPenguin thats a great idea...! but does that match a good documentation.

@PrashanthBenny, What is your actual question?

@sa_leinad i am requesting a nice documentation portal for arduino. Just like how stack overflow has got one!


text:
Electorate badge description

The Electorate gold badge description says 'Vote on 600 questions and 25% or more of total votes are on questions'
The word questions is duplicate and it is unclear. Let we change this text!

You are changing the meaning with your suggestions. The meaning is:

Vote on 600 questions - first requirement
25% or more total votes are on questions - second requirement

So for example, you might have made 2400 votes, and of that 2400, 600 are on questions (and therefore 1800 are on answers). This would meet the requirement for the badge.

Nothing to change, this description looks nice.

I don't quite understand why your question says we should change the text, and then you answer saying we don't need to change it.

This is a kind of discussion. Check (vote) one answer you prefer to introduce at this description. Or write another, 4th answer.

Vote on 600 posts and 25% or more of total votes are on questions

Vote on 600 messages and 25% or more of total votes are on questions


text:
What is the standard practice for when the OP edits the question to include the solution?
What is the standard practice for when the OP edits the question to include the solution?
For example:

error while loading libtinfo.so.5 - SOLVED
DB:NO RESP Using inet.httpPOST on loop()
SOLVED - Different behaviour during bootloader burning
Arduino UNO stops working after a while - SOLVED

Ideally, the OP should have posted the solution as an answer and then marked it as the solution.
In some cases, I would like to edit the question by deleting the solution and then post the solution as an answer. The down side to this is that this answer would have no upvotes and may appear insignificant compared to other posts with upvotes. Also, the OP may no longer be active and/or doesn't mark the answer as the solution.
For some posts (especially those without an answer) the correct course of action would be to close/delete the question.

I've been chatting with other moderators about this. One suggestion was to revert the edited question (where the answer is) and ask the OP to make a proper answer instead.
If this isn't practical (eg. if the question is old) the other suggestion is to make your own answer, but make it a Community Wiki answer. That way you don't claim credit for someone else's work.
You could put at the bottom of the answer:
Posted on behalf of the OP.

A good method is to leave a comment to educate the OP that what he/she has done is not in-step with the Stack Exchange system. After all, the aim of this site is that the community builds up and educate other users, in order to improve the overall quality of the site.
We then leave it up to the OP to do the right thing; revert the question back to the original and post the solution as an answer and accept it.
As an example, @Chris Stratton posted this eloquent comment:

@OP in the stack exchange system, questions are marked resolved not by editing the title[/question], but by accepting an answer. If none of the provided answers matches your solution, provide your own and accept that.

@Chris Stratton do you mind if other users use your comment as a sort of a boiler-plate comment?


text:
Seeking help versus outsourcing labour for free
Sometimes users ask questions that basically shift the research and development work of a particular project or product into the hands of the community.
This problem is somewhat related to not being specific enough, but bears another issue: acquiring free labour from the community without giving something in return.
It's a problem that isn't new, not even on StackExchange.
But I recognised it on Arduino SE too.
It goes without saying that SE is a platform where people get to ask questions.
Oftentimes without knowing in advance what is involved in finding an answer.
We all sometimes need a pointer to a solution or can make great use of someone else's experience.
But some questions have a certain smell that the poster would rather have others magically come up with a production-ready solution to their complex design ideas – and implement them too.
How should we deal with questions that basically just ask for free engineering work?

+1 - There was one blatant question that caught my eye recently, I forget if it was on SE Arduino, Pi or Robotics, that asked for some code to be written for the OP and then to be emailed to them (they provided an email address!). I flagged it and it has, fortunately, been removed. Another one, that comes to mind was a question that tried to get a software team together that could deliver a project. That question went the way of the first... :-)

Is this an example of a "outsourcing labour for free" question? http://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/22660/integrating-arduino-program-with-java

You might have mentioned getting help with homework, and college assignments too. :)
On the face of it, this site is designed to answer specific questions, and when it is used like that, I see no problem if the question is being used by an engineer in some company, a high-school kid, or someone doing a thesis. Of course, this is in addition to hobbyists, and others who simply want to learn.
However overly-broad questions, like "I have an assignment to monitor heart rate - please provide the code for me ... oh, and a schematic" can simply be voted-to-close as too broad. This is asking for work to be done, not to have a question answered.
If there is doubt, asking for them to clarify what they have already tried can soon wiggle out people who are serious, from those trying to avoid work. For example:

What have you tried already? However see this: “What have you tried” epidemic. So don't post a comment "What you you tried?" on its own. It isn't helpful.
Where did you get stuck?
Please post your current code, even if it doesn't work
Please post your schematic
Please post links to your (proposed) hardware

We are not really supposed to answer shopping questions, or about which device is "best" to buy. These are too subjective.
Without being too snaky about it, we can also see what research they have already done. Sometimes I say "I see Google returns 100,000 results on a search for Arduino +yourIdea - in what way did those hits not help your project?".

While I agree with this answer in general, it's the too-broad vs. work-to-be-done difference in particular that I'm contemplating about. A question asking for free labour really isn't necessarily too broad (and vive versa). Voting to close is a way to deal with the problem, but a rather subjective one as long as there aren't any tangible criteria. In the end I feel that the too-broad reason would be used inflationary – and the underlying issue still wouldn't be addressed.

I think the simple answer is that we don't provide "free labour" - we answer questions. Thus "asking" for code to be written from scratch isn't a question that has a reasonable answer. However asking why a certain function doesn't turn on an LED is a reasonable question.


text:
How should questions be handled, if the source of the problem is only a typo in the OP's source code?

How would you prefer to handle a Question, if the source of the problem is only a typo in the OP's source code?

has been made a question on the current Moderator Election's Questionnaire. I could not retrieve any standing policy on that matter on meta nor is it part of the guidelines laid out in the helpcenter.
Given that a site's policy should be defined by its community and not just the moderators (or at least that is my take on it) I would like to discuss the issue here.
Stackoverflow has an appropriate rule:

Some questions are still off-topic, even if they fit into one of the categories listed above:

Questions about a problem that can no longer be reproduced or that was caused by a simple typographical error. While similar questions may be on-topic here, these are often resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers. This can often be avoided by identifying and closely inspecting the shortest program necessary to reproduce the problem before posting.

So the question is: do we recognize the wisdom of SO's rule or do we consider code with simple typographical errors a phenomenon common enough to the users of Arduino - including questioners at a beginner's level - that might profit from answering such questions?

Many of our users are just starting out in programming. To them, it can be hard to spot the difference between digitalWrite and DigitalWrite, or digtalWrite. Also, there is a well-known phenomenon that we all suffer from called Code Blindness - from looking at the code for so long that you can no longer really see what is there.
In these situations, a fresh pair of eyes is essential to spot little errors like these.
Is it off topic? Possibly. However, that's not helpful to the novice user trying to get their first (non-built-in example) program to compile.
So I say answer the question pointing out (gently) what is wrong.
They come here looking for our help. It's our job to give them that help (as long as they're asking something about Arduino and not C++ programming in general unless pertaining to working on a microcontroller and the restrictions that imposes) - whether or not that question and answer help someone else in the future.
Who knows? These small typos made by novice users are common. Maybe it will help someone else in future. Probably not though. But still, that user went away happy and the overall impression of the helpfulness of this site increased by a tiny margin.
If the question ends up being closed by the community in the future, no matter - the OP is happy and will come back again and maybe bring their friends with them.

FWW, I am currently trying to track down a compiler error and seeing previous answers to the effect of, "you left out a semicolon, idiot" have been very helpful in seeing what can lead to that particular error. it turns out that's not my problem, but I'm reluctant to post it as a question because I don't want a beat-down.

The trouble is, it isn't just typos that are likely to be things that are "one-off" problems. Sometimes we get highly-specific questions about certain code that may have a logic error. Next time it will be a different logic error, so answering the question doesn't necessarily help anyone later on.
This is unlike, say, questions about Linux about how to combine stderr and stdout into one file. This is a question that a lot of people will want the answer to.
Having said all that, I would also agree with Majenko's answer.

I am the author of that question. And I am for the SO approach. Why? Because it is possible to generate endless count of this kind of questions as anonymous user and then answer them. I don't know if an anonymous user can accept an answer, but this answers tend to get upvotes.
A comment can point out the error and the question should be closed as "Unclear what you are asking" in the meaning "it is obvious".

Thank you for presenting your point. If I may ask, did you observe a pattern to that end on this stack, i.e. a large number of question of this kind that disrupts the operation of the site? 1 rep users can in fact accept answers but they cannot upvote. I have never heard of suspicious voting behaviour with this sort of questions so far.

I disagree about closing as "Unclear what you are asking".  If we want to close these questions because they're one-off problems & might generate endless numbers of similar questions, then we should have a custom close reason for that purpose.


text:
Does Arduino beta have a community ad?
I realize beta sites don't have ads on the site, but I'd like to put one for the site on rotation at https://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com/ (they are being renewed for the year now).
If not and someone wants to whip something up, please do -- leave a comment if you need a bit of time, otherwise tomorrow I will.  Technically, the ads can be replaced after posting although that may be limited by when it crosses the upvote threshold.
The meta thread on RPi.SE is here: https://raspberrypi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/893/community-promotion-ads-2017 For those that aren't familiar with this, Stack Exchange does it annually for all graduated sites.  The ads appear in the side bar and have a target link (which would be Arduino.SE).

Where would it go? I went to the Pi site and didn't see any ads.

You're not the only one -- never something I've looked into.  Anyway, it's in the sidebar right  above "Hot Network Questions".

I had to disable Adblock, and various trackers to see it.

Yeah there's google driven ads in there; sometime last year they started doing it on selected sites for all users regardless of rep (I believe there's a top bar one everywhere for the new-ish).  We were so blessed because we have a lot of page views...

Here, I widened your graphic a bit:

\O/ You should throw it up on EE now too, all the "Community Promotion" renewals are done at the same time: http://meta.electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/6082/community-promotion-ads-2017

I found one over on Electrical Engineering done last year by Camil Staps:

The new criteria require it be 300x250, though:

Yuk, it needs to be re-done. :)

@NickGammon Padding instead of stretching seems an improvement.

Yes but it looks a bit, er, bold. It should be possible to redo it easily enough.


text:
What is a canonical question, exactly?
I've been reading some posts about canonical questions, and am still not sure what they are. Examples:

Can we get some canonical questions going?

Should we make a canonical “How to send data using serial?” question?

The Wikipedia of Long Tail Programming Questions

Is a canonical question like what we would call in Australia a Dorothy Dixer where you ask a question to which you know the answer? For example:

Q. (by Nick) How do interrupts work on the Arduino?
A. (by Nick) Glad you asked! I'll explain them ...

Or is it (as some of the links above seem to indicate) just improving existing questions?

I could probably do some "reference" questions if they were wanted, I just want to clarify if that is what is intended by the expression.

I also notice a checkbox: "Answer your own question". What does that do? Does that mean you put the question and the answer into the same post, or does it indicate you are planning to answer your own question?

I would sum it up as this: a question with an answer that is generally regarded as "the authority" on a topic. For example, "avrdude: stk500_getsync(): not in sync: resp=0x00," aka Some Dude Named Avr Won't Let Me Upload My Program is basically a canonical question.
The goal is to compile one source of information that is more useful than lots of fragmented answers across hundreds of questions.

I also notice a checkbox: "Answer your own question". What does that do? Does that mean you put the question and the answer into the same post, or does it indicate you are planning to answer your own question?

Click on it! It adds another textbox that is converted into an answer when you post. It's a good idea to do this out of respect for others; if the question and answer are both posted at the same time, people won't spend wasting time researching and writing answers when you are drafting your own answer.


text:
Some of the "unanswered" questions don't really deserve that title
I've been browsing the unanswered questions, partly because Area 15 says:

71% answered: Needs Work – 90% answered is a healthy beta, 80% answered needs some work.

However I've found some "unanswered" questions really were answered, for example:

Crash when using std::queue. That had a perfectly good answer by Edgar Bonet, however he did it as a comment, not an answer so it didn't count.
What could cause interrupts from MCP23017 suddenly stop working? - the OP worked out the problem and acknowledged that in a comment, however the question went "unanswered".
Attiny85 programmer with Arduino error Yikes! Invalid device signature - again, answered in the question comments, and acknowledged as such by the OP.
After putting Arduino Uno into DFU mode, it is no longer recognised by PC - the OP is asked for clarification but doesn't respond so the question lapses.

It seems to me unfair that these questions go into the "29% unanswered" bundle when they really were answered, or the OP simply lost interest (probably got it answered somewhere else).
Does this seem right? Is there a way of fixing up these statistics in some way?

Attiny85 programmer with Arduino error Yikes! Invalid device signature - I don't think that one ever got answered as the OP was vague as to what worked and then went on to buy a proper programmer. Note I was commenting there.

In cases where there's already an answer in the comments (or edited into the original question by the OP), we could copy it into a Community Wiki answer, with an appropriate acknowledgement. That will show up as an answer, but will prevent reputation going to the wrong person.
In situations where a question can't be answered due to lack of information (and the OP hasn't responded for a long time), we can vote to close the question as "Unclear what you're asking".
These steps won't solve the problem entirely, but it might help a little. What's important is to get the community involved in Review tasks so that problems can be dealt-with quickly. The other moderators and I aren't really supposed to do that ourselves (we're only supposed to deal with exceptional cases). I see the review queues are getting rather long again though, so we may have to step in to help things move along.

I've always suggested the OP make their comment an answer so others can find it more easily. They can get the reputation, as well.

Related: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/117251/what-should-be-done-with-questions-that-have-been-self-resolved-as-a-comment-ins

Cleaning up these ild questions will make the site look cleaner, and I think that will help longer-term to improve the review process.


text:
Is a question "is this possible" too broad?
I've seen a few questions like this one which seem so broad as to be meaningless.

My requirement is to read data from ibeacons near me using Arduino. Is it possible?

Well, most things are possible, with enough effort. Maybe not video editing on a Duemilanove, but you get the idea.
I voted to close that one because it was a virtual duplicate of another post by the same fellow but in any case isn't this question a bit hard to answer?
I personally try to be helpful if I can, but questions like that seem to suggest that the OP has not done any research at all, and basically wants code written. In the second thread I linked he said:

My requirement is to read data transmitted from iBeacon, is it possible using HC-05 or I have to shift to HM-10?
Please help.

Am I being too harsh? Or do we need to encourage people to try a bit harder with their questions?

The referenced question is crystal clear to anyone who knows the first thing about the technologies in question.  Those who don't understand it probably aren't in a position to write useful answers anyway.  Compatibility of radio modems is relatively binary - they either work together or they don't with little room between. The first referenced device (HC-05) is incompatible no matter what someone does, while the second (HM-10) contains one of the two most widely used chips for that purpose, meaning that it merely comes down to the question of what firmware has been loaded into that chip.

"Well, most things are possible, with enough effort. Maybe not video editing on a Duemilanove..." Challenge accepted!


text:
Community Promotion Ads — 2019
2019 is here! And with the new year, as usual, comes a new iteration of Community Promotion Ads! Let’s refresh these for the coming year :)
What are Community Promotion Ads?
Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.
Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?
This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:

the site's twitter account
interesting stories and creations with Arduino that folks have published
helpful resources for folks wanting to work with Arduino
cool events or conferences
anything else your community would genuinely be interested in

The goal is for future visitors to find out about the stuff your community deems important. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are relevant to your own community's interests, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.
Why do we reset the ads every year?
Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.
The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.
How does it work?
The answers you post to this question must conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.

All answers should be in the exact form of:
[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]

   [1]: http://image-url
   [2]: http://clickthrough-url

Please do not add anything else to the body of the post. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.
The question must always be tagged with the magic community-ads tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.

Image requirements

The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
Must be GIF or PNG
No animated GIFs
Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.

Score Threshold
There is a minimum score threshold an answer must meet (currently 6) before it will be shown on the main site.
You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats here.

When does this need to be done by - Or is this dynamic throughout the year based on the most votes?

The latter, @sa_leinad: this has no "due date."

Apparently this was our ad a few moons ago.

What's the point of an ad on arduino for arduino?

This is a demonstration post to indicate how this should look when an ad is posted. It also doubles as your twitter ad, but it's up to you if you wish to promote it by voting


text:
2019 Community Moderator Election Results
Arduino's second moderator election has come to a close, the votes have been tallied and the new moderator is:

They'll be joining the existing crew shortly—please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!
Also, please join me in thanking Anonymous Penguin who will be stepping down as moderator.
For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results here, or view a summary report online.


text:
Featured Questions
There is no section saying 'Featured Questions' in the 'Unanswered Questions Tab'.
How do I find those questions that have active bounties on them?

The "Featured" tab only appears if there are featured questions to show. Currently, I don't think we have any active bounties, which is why the tab isn't there.
Also, as far as I know, the tab appears on the main home page and under "Questions". It doesn't appear in the "Unanswered questions" section.

Now a featured question has come.