text:
Moderator abuses, a case study. Why to introduce the "power of recall" on SE network
Final note: The meta.meta.se new question has been deleted again while in the works by user animuson. Enough.

Your question was closed because you're rambling on about a process
  that already exists just not in the exact form you desire, and your
  reasoning for wanting it are based on a false premise that you'd done
  absolutely nothing to try and resolve the correct way. We're not
  having another discussion about this where you don't listen to anyone.
  It's very clear from your behavior that you just want to ramble and
  ignore everyone's feedback. You did it for many hours yesterday.

I wrote yesterday about the existing procedure, you can find it searching for "Update2" on this page.

Update2: some user noted in the comments that a recall procedure
  already exists. But 1) The procedure can be initiated by moderators
  and the company team only, the victims are excluded from the chance to
  initiate the trial, 2) there's no jury for decision making, again: the
  potential victims are excluded from the trial, 3) there's no guarantee
  that the trial will be properly anonymized and then published (the
  minutes could be published IF undefined needs arise). 4) there's no
  accessible archive of previous judgments. In general: someone could
  even question the existance of this procedure, because there's no way
  for the community to access it before, during, or after.

As animuson is a Senior Product Support Specialist at Stack Overflow... well, alea jacta est. I think is fair to say that StackOverflow took a definitive decision. And would be pure unsolicited bothering to insist. Not in my veins.
There's no point to contribute to SE if the judicial part is badly lacking minimum quality standards. And bad enough this is a common problem on all those modern platforms where a relatively small team of people must take care of a huge user base. They always tend to walk the shortcut, cutting down individual rights to save on time/costs. Then beautifying the democracity of the electron they are consuming. Time passes, some things didn't change (yet). But nowadays plenty people collected enough experience about reputation-based systems; thanks to the past bad happenings on similar platforms (example: Dave Jones' bitter Discovery ). The more bad stories, the more people awakes. Hopefully anytime soon there will be enough critical mass (of disgusted users with good ideas in mind) to force those companies to adopt what we once called "digital rights": privacy already got a step forward recently thanks to Edward Snowden. Freedom of Speech has been helped by the adoption of modern COW filesystems and flex information architectures, in the way censorship is shallow (ie: you don't see my messages any more, but there's good chance they still exist on multiple disks). And Bitcoin haven't been strangled in its baby cot like have been for DigiCash 20 years before. So, after all, things are going better. Despite small accidents like this one.
From now on, I won't be following the comments unless some good news from StackOverflow management. Please write new answers only, in the case a well grounded procedure for moderators removal has been established.
So I adapt myself: good luck on SE, bye bye, and thank you for all the (past and future) fish.

(I've been deleted AGAIN, on the way to split the issues. The following is what was in place.)
Author's note: After 2 days of discussions on 2 different topics, I'm re-editing the whole question(s) in order to make easier to partecipate. Thanks to all that helped pointing out existing procedures and resources.
Here you find the aruino.meta.se issue (alleged moderator abuse). On meta.meta.se you'll find the proposed general solution.
If you don't feel like being serious at the moment, just get some pop-corns and enjoy a quick and dirty representation of the following story: "The Orville - Season 1, Episode 7, Majority Rule"
(Fair) STORYLINE
(please, report in comments if some detail is not fairly reported in this storyline; I linked all I could and survived the censorship, in order for anyone to be able to freely and indipendently shape his own idea)

I posted a question about the CH340 chips found on some arduino clones. The question has been put on hold first for being off-topic, deleted right after the second comment from me, asking for claryfication and quoting the on-topic list page stating the whole board and clones being in scope of arduino.se.
I asked myself wheter was worth or not to keep spending time helping others on this reputation-based social Q&A platform, because wrong judiciary officials can destroy your long lasting efforts in a second. I've been reading solutions on SE for a decade: do I really need to give back some of the goodies I got or it is better for me to keep leeching in silence and go back to the dear old RFC1855-based forum/ml/ng? Let's think positive, and try to solve the judiciary issue before going back to work: I owe to SE community, after all. So I opened a second question on the general meta.se portal  in order to ask for a well-known procedure that could mitigate this risk. Given the higher abstraction level, the meta.meta.se looked the best context to post it. Right? Wrong. The second question has been first put on hold at first (voted off because "question's topic is only applicable to one specific site in the Stack Exchange Network."), deleted right after. So I moved the question back to arduino.meta as required by the meta.meta.se users/admins.
In the while time I privately contacted the community team but I got 2 messages from a bot and 1 from an ostrich (or an italian mafia guy: "Noooothing I'vve seeeeen, capisc'?", can't really tell what was on the other side). Then nothing more... anyway, I hope you're laughing. Cause this wall of text is huuuuuge and we need to relax sometimes. Back to work: at this point of time I want to think that the ostrich sent a signal to the Almighty Community Team, and the Benevolent Community Team had a chat with the moderator that had closed my arduino.se question. Sweet dreams are melodies...
The moderator attempted an answer here on this arduino.meta.se question, missing the whole point like many other users did: the point is not "why" he put on hold my original question, but the act of deleting the question instead of make it clear why he put that on hold; we are 1 step ahead now. We are at demanding the "power of recall", not let me post my question. Anyway: his off-topic, and rationale-less typing has been recorded, and his effort/time appreciated. It should be appreciated, at least: many commenters on meta.meta.se insisted that by not having the original question, they couldn't judge the situation because the other side of the story was missing. That's why judicials can't be taken at large: judging at large easily becomes lynching. Anyway, now we have the other side of the story; long story short: when I posted the second comment insisting on comparing the on-topic list with my case, he decided it was not worth discussing with me, and deleted the question just for fun. Basically he doesn't want to accept arduino.se rules (on-topic list and code of conduct) and instead of talking to other moderators and community managers in order to change the rules he doesn't like, he first harass the users and then delete their questions in order to not be questioned. Because whoever discuss his moderation "is just one of those many whiners like you, he met in his long time here in SE" (rephrased to shorten). Honestly yesterday I granted him the benefit of the doubt. Now his intention is declared instead. I know many politicians, some cops, and all the judges I know, having the same attitude. And criminals as well: "Your Hoooonor! Please, let's forget about the past and be friend all togheter!". That's why long time ago the Magna Charta was bloodily requested and unwillingly signed...
The best thing to do would be to undelete both the previous questions, and edit those; in order to not loose the history; but I don't have the privilege, the ostrich is busy, and the moderator would like to be an ostrich. So, in order to avoid the same confusion many users did yesterday, I've split the two issues in two separate questions, as reccomended by some users/admins in the 2-days, multiple-threads, discussion: I leave here on arduino.meta.se the meta-discussion on the deleted arduino question, and open a new meta-question on meta.meta.se strictly tailored on the more general topic of the "power of recall" procedure that could benefit the entire SE network.

Given the previous events:
- can my question be undeleted so I can slightly update instead of opening a new one working around the previous issue?
- because this single issue isn't that important after all, can we now (after the moderator expressed his side of the story) focus on the real topic (the need of a "power of recall") so that these obnoxious abuses and the following excruciating discussions can be reduced making SE a bit better than already is now?
Thank you.

WORK IN PROGRESS. STUFF TO BE MOVED BACK TO meta.meta.se
(Original question posted on meta.meta.se, I couldn't move it back there)
I've just been the victim of a wrong moderation decision. Before going to the point, I try to summarize my case because it is the perfect case study for requesting the introduction of the "power of recall" in Stack Exchange. Long story (short, if you read bold words only):

Arduino Stack Exchange, I post my first question (note: the question is deleted, the link can't be accessed) about how to program a variant of the companion chip that comes on some arduino boards. The original arduinos come with an USB-serial converter from the company FTDI, arduino clones instead come with any cheaper chip can do the job (usually CH340). I swapped the onboard CH340C chip with a CH340B variant, making it a different arduino clone. The change I made is exactly the same change between an original Arduino NanoV3 (with FTDI chip) and my unbranded NanoV3 clone (with CH340C chip). Actually, by swapping the "C" variant with the "B" variant I basically re-added a functionality that the original board have and the clone (with "C" variant chip) doesn't. I called mine Frankenuino NanoV3, clone (with CH340B chip). Nothing fancy has been added or removed from the clone board.
after a couple of minutes moderator Majenko put the question on hold for being off-topic. So I went to check the on-topic page because, being a new user, I had the doubt to really be off-topic and wanted a better understanding of my wrongdoing. But I've found to be perfectly on-topic: "On topic: Specific questions about Arduino boards, ..., clones/counterfeits/derivatives" (quoted from the on-topic page just linked). Note that the arduino stack exchange covers the whole board (ie: not the main chip only) AND the clones (ie: not the original arduino only). So I couldn't follow the first part of the guideline on the closed question page: "Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope.", because the question was already well inside the scope. But I could follow the second part about asking in the comments to the moderator why the question had been closed

@Majenko Why did you tag this question as off-topic? "On topic:
  Specific questions about Arduino boards, ...,
  clones/counterfeits/derivatives" (
  arduino.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic ). The USB-serial converter is
  part of the board and strictly needed to access that kind of board.

and he had replied

No, the Arduino software and the MCU on the board are on topic. What
  makes you think we would know anything about custom programming of a
  proprietary chip that is not used on any official Arduino boards? If
  there is no tool in apt or on github then you're probably stuffed.

This is evidence that the moderator didn't read/understand the on-topic page (where it is clearly stated "board" instead of "the MCU only", and "clones" instead of "official Arduino boards"), or is involved in some kind of copyright/patents devoted religion, or simply doesn't pay attention when reading. In any case, the moderator doesn't fit the role.
So I insisted:

@Majenko did you read the on-topic definition page before closing
  questions like this? I quoted the page in the previous comment. 1) It
  says "board" not "AVR MCU", 2) It explicitly says
  "clones/counterfeits/derivatives". In other words you are not allowed
  to close this question. Please vote for re-open.

And he simply... deleted the question.
As a result:

By closing the question he denied me the chance to partecipate to Stack Exchange.
By not accepting discussion, he denied Stack Exchange (ie: us all) the chance to have better moderation by having moderators that know the common rules we all have.
By deleting the question I've lost the time I've spent to produce it. Because I've lost access to it: I can't discuss further, I can't link it to another context, and as soon as I close the browser page I'll loose that text for ever.

It's a sluggish form of censorship very common nowadays in many different contexts, and always unacceptable.
Now, because Stack Overflow is run by me (together with you all) by public elections and increasing the hierarchy depth (user->moderator->super moderator->mega super moderator->and so on...) is an endless game that increase costs, never solve 100% of the issues forcing the introduction of more depth in the hierarchy in order to refine the selection process for moderators, I'd like to see the introduction of "power of recall" in Stack Exchange in a similar way it has been done in the Parliament of the United Kingdom in 2015: "proceedings are initiated only if an MP is found guilty of a wrongdoing that fulfils certain criteria".
So there's the need to define such criteria to define "wrongdoing". The first criteria that should be taken into consideration is the one I violated here: privacy, the name of the misbehaving moderator, OR his wrongdoing, shouldn't be known. Because the goal is not to lynch someone; the goal is to improve the community. But it is not our case study.
The second criteria that should be took into consideration in all reputation-based information systems is about the Freedom of Speech: "if, after a mistake, the moderator enact another privileged action in order to conceal the previous mistaken privileged action, and by doing so denying himself a chance to learn and preventing any chance of further investigation by the community for the community". And this is our case study: by deleting the question, the damage increased, instead of giving us the chance to understand what's on-topic and what's off-topic.
That's just a draft. And there might be further criteria that can automatically trigger a recall procedure. The point I'm trying to do is that there must be a way to get rid of people unfit for the role, in the same way there is one to elect them in that role. So, if you are willing to keep going with moderators election, you must introduce a way to make those moderators think twice and more in general to make them a better moderation class.
Because the general public can't be expert of a single topic (in our case "arduino"), there must be a procedure to vote the moderator off, accessible by all the users (over 100 reputation?) of that portal only. In our case study is pretty simple as the on-topic page clearly states what's on-topic, but in some cases there could be the need of more peculiar knowledge. And the users of a single stack exchange portal are the only one supposed to understand the issue.
1) Feature request: Who do I have to write this note to? Any advices? Toughts?
2) Solving my issue on arduino portal: I'll try to re-post exactly the same question. But I guess it will be censored again. This is what the "unfit administrators" usually do. Is there any other existing procedure I didn't find in my investigations?
Update1: this is not a duplicate of question n.28867. That question is asking what options exist already. I'm asking if a particular procedure can be implemented in the (near?) future. Moreover, my concerns are not only about my single case - as I can ask questions in other contexts (ex: arduino forum) - it's about making stackexchange better, and in particular prevent moderator abuses. Low quality moderators bring to users leaving stackexchange in search of better options.
Update2: some user noted in the comments that a recall procedure already exists. But 1) The procedure can be initiated by moderators and the company team only, the victims are excluded from the chance to initiate the trial, 2) there's no jury for decision making, again: the potential victims are excluded from the trial, 3) there's no guarantee that the trial will be properly anonymized and then published (the minutes could be published IF undefined needs arise). 4) there's no accessible archive of previous judgments. In general: someone could even question the existance of this procedure, because there's no way for the community to access it before, during, or after.
Update3: some users noted in the comment that the question is off-topic, and it isn't:
If your question is about:

- Stack Exchange
...
- Support, feature requests, or bug reports for the core Stack Exchange engine that powers all Stack Exchange websites

… it is welcome here.

( https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic )

Update4: it looks like many commenters aren't reading the title, or can't understand the issue. From the comments: "you keep saying that a moderator is unqualified for deleting one of your questions". This is spam: I challenge anyone finding me asking even once to remove the delete privilege from moderator's role. Please avoid commenting without reading, or driven by reasons different from contributing to the solution of the issue in question.

Related: Toxic moderation harms the community

I note that your post on Meta Stack Exchange has been put on hold. Rather ironic, as you are complaining about posts being closed and now your complaint is put on hold. The reasons given are that the complaint is (they say) specific to this site, however I'm inclined to agree that complaints about moderators in general are not specific to this site.

@NickGammon I feel like Lt. John LaMarr in the 7th episode of The Orville ( https://orville.fandom.com/wiki/Majority_Rule ): landed on a planet called Sargas4, filmed while dancing with a statue for fun, bound to the electric chair watching the reputation counters going up/down and shitting my pants because the 10 million negative vote triggers the electric chair. Eheh. Yes, rather ironic. But it was a while without some sparring with a tons of minions. It's fun, after all.

@NickGammon I got Reputelectrocuted! I'll have to do the Apologies Tour!

@NickGammon, I found the Question. I don't understand why Majenko deleted it. It could be by mistake? https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/68446/usb-to-serial-chip-ch340b-internal-eeprom-programming-from-linux

@Anichang - The link to the "question on the general meta.se portal", item 2. is invalid because the post was deleted (off-topic). You did manage to get -17 rep for it though. Well done.

@VE7JRO Thanks, I'll fix it when I go deleting the left overs. I'm currently editing the quesion on meta.meta.se in order to move out the stuff from here. I'll checkout everything once the split is completed. About the -17 rep: I expected to get between "N(N-1)/2" and "2^N-N-1" (N = moderators number on SE network) negative votes, so the result is well beyond my best expectations.

Can you give us a link to the question on meta.meta.se?

I can't! The old question has been deleted, the new one is still in the making. We are talking of the meta.meta.se questions, not the arduino and arduino.meta ones.

But you said you were "currently editing the question". I'm confused.

There isn't much yet. But here it is: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333127/do-we-need-power-of-recall-to-avoid-moderator-abuses

That link also gives a 404 error...

Just the time to post the draft, copy the link and switch tab to give it to you and ... it was deleted again. Unless the community team clean up their mess, there's no point to keep going. Nor to enrich SE with free content.

now I see why Majenko deleted the Question on Arduino SE

Your question was blatantly off topic.
If you buy a Dongfeng car and rip out the factory installed stereo, then buy a Fony™ stereo and fit it yourself, would you then go to a Ford dealership to ask how to tune the stereo to your favourite station?  No.  You'd get laughed all the way down the road.
You do NOT presume to dictate to us what wuestions we are and are not allowed to close.  I have met many many people like you in my time here. You live to complain (as evidenced by the fact that your "complaint" question is far more detailed than your actual question...!)
Off topic is off topic is off topic. No amount of complaining on your part will change that. The moment it became apparent that it was the start of a long, drawn out whine by you, I deleted the question. I refuse to get into arguments with moaners like you about what is and is not on topic, when what you are asking is blatantly off topic.
Be glad it was only the question I deleted.
I can guarantee that, if I hadn't closed the question, within a matter of minutes it would have been closed as "off topic" anyway by others - because it was off topic. 100% off topic.

"Queri ego cogito ergo sum"

So much text, and no reasons why it was off-topic. I ask you again: did you read the list of on-topic items for the arduino SE? I don't dictate anything: I've no provileges to enforce my words! My naked keyboard only! That page instead, passively does. Those kind of pages are called "rules", and are published in order to make clear in advance what can be done and what not. Here there are multiple pages like that, example: the code of conduct page. And you should read them all before deciding yourself alone to declare war to arduino clones, or put-down someone that complaints of you.

How can I put it more simply: The CH340B and its internal workings are not on topic. Programming said chip through its external interface is off topic. Just because you stuck it to an Arduino does not make it magically on topic for an Arduino site.  It may fit on the Electrical Engineering SE site, but it is NOT on topic here.

Dude, on arduino.se there are 2 pages of questions tagged CH340. The B/C/T/S/M... chip have the same CH340 datasheet. I've some of those Nano with the CH340B on them (that's why I bought more). I bought some Dongfeng cars and they sent me some with blue stereo LEDs and some with red stereo LEDs, so I went to a mechanic shop with a big blinking sign outside "Dongfeng car repairs HERE" asking to change the red leds into blue leds. Does it sounds good to you?

Yes, and NONE of them have anything to do with the internals of the chip and programming it. Using it as part of an Arduino and getting it to work WITH ARDUINO, fine. Using the chip itself? NO!

Anyway, your answer doesn't answer the question. The question advices a well known method for recalling elected administrators, requests for comments and wheter or not is possible to introduce something similar in SE. You are off-topic.

You see, this is exactly why I deleted the question. Whatever anyone says will be wrong. You are right, and everyone else is wrong. I refuse to argue with you - it is pointless. The question is off topic. Final answer. DO NOT ARGUE.

Dude, again: that chip (and its internals) is ON-BOARD! And the on-topic list clearly says "board" not "MCU". This SE is called "Arduino" (board), not "AVR MCUs". Please stop jumping from the branding issue to the board/mcu issue, and back. They exist in your mind only, as they both are well placed in the scope of arduino.se. Look: the FTDI chip on the original arduinos have the same features of the CH340B. And same of you FTDI made a campaign to discredit their competitors! They even developed a virus to break the CH340 chips and pushed it as driver for CH340 chips! You are doing the same...

I refuse to engage with you any more. You just won't take no for an answer. Goodbye.

"I refuse to engage with you any more." I'm glad you wrote openly. Because that's exactly the abuse of privileges that makes you an admin bad enough to need the "power of recall". To make a mistake is fine and human; I do at least one minor and one major every day. To refuse to discuss a potential mistake instead is unacceptable. To delete the traces of the mistake is the worst you could do. When you don't want to discuss any more - and in this case you have to, because you have some responsibilities; I don't, I've due diligence only; you do - you can simply stop writing. Deleting is too much

There is a way of contact the Community Managers who are the ones that manage moderators. I think the form here goes to them.
See also Handling Calls to Remove a Moderator and What recourse do I have if I believe a moderator has abused their privileges?.
I do not think you are completely powerless here. Those links outline the process for dealing with problems with moderators.

And yes, I read those questions too and updated my question accordingly. See Update1 and Update2 at the end of my question.

I would like to chip in my support for the Arduino Stack Exchange moderators (both past and present). They are volunteers who donate their time to keep this stack exchange running and spam free for all of us to enjoy. A heartfelt thank you.
@Anichang I would have voted that your question was off-topic if it was in a review queue. Granted, you were modifying an Arduino clone by replacing a chip with another (more advanced) chip, but the question you ask is how to create a Linux command line tool that lets you access the advanced features of the new chip. It wasn't really about the Arduino clone - it was about programming the advanced features of a new chip only.
If you had of asked about using the Arduino clone, programming a sketch into the Arduino clone or a problem you were experiencing using the Arduino clone that didn't happen with a standard Arduino, then it would be on topic.
A good way to test if a question is about Arduino is to remove the Arduino references from the question. If the question still makes complete sense and the references to Arduino don't add any value to the question, then it is off topic.
If you had of asked how you could identify your Arduino clones on your USB hub, then that would have been on topic.
It is very likely that in the current form your question would have been closed as off topic by the community. Like the moderators, we volunteer our time to answer people's questions about Arduino.
Instead of the long post you put up here (and on Meta.SE) because you disagreed with your post being closed, imagine the good you could have done if you had of put the same amount of effort into answering some of the Arduino questions here.

Once we have the on-topic page explicitly placing ON-TOPIC clones and derivatives. what you "feel" and what the moderator "felt" is irrelevant. Moreover, the moderator made clear that his concern is about branding, ie: it's a copyright/trademark/branding crusade - it's censorship - not a well placed reasoning making spam of my question about a derivative board. Please, as I stated, don't add more off-topic answers. I kept this question on hold until a reasonable way to remove admins by the people, for the people, has been added.

About donating time for no-profit activities: I'm not questioning the good hearted behaviours. I, myself, created my account as I felt to owe something to SE community after about 10 years of finding solutions on these pages. Check my history: I created the account to help others. My first question was after I answered a few questions, and was just a way to figure out how the system works. Unfurtunately, my final evalutation is: no worth using SE to help others, because it lacks the same features lacking on all the other modern "socials". Tried, dumped.

It is clear that you just want to argue and not take on any feedback whatsoever.

That's obvious: it's a Q/A system! And this is the meta side of it: Q about the Q/A system, ends in itself. Pure arguing. More in general, plenty functional illiterates complaint of others not listening/reading/accepting other's opinions; it's pretty common nowadays. Many go searching for "Communication for dummies" or more fancy Schopenhauer's "Die Kunst, Recht zu behalten". Instead of refine their reasoning. I can't know wheter you didn't read or you didn't understand, in any case your discussion points have all been exposed before you posted. There was no need for you to write answers.


text:
Programming questions moving to StackOverflow
There are many programming questions in Arduino (there is even a tag for it).
However, some are not related to Arduino, like
What happens if I pass a temporary reference and store it as a class member?
There is a flag/close/offtopic because/This question belongs on another site in the Stack Exchange network option, but StackOverflow is not mentioned as possible candidate.
So far I flag the question and ask a moderator to move, but what is the preferred solution?
Just closing down the question, seems also not useful, especially if it can be answered while it is in Arduino StackExchange (even though it will be moved preferably).

There is a flag/close/offtopic because/This question belongs on another site in the Stack Exchange network option, but StackOverflow is not mentioned as possible candidate.

If you are referring to the "Flagging > Closing > Off-Topic > Migration" window, I believe users with the required reputation can "see" this option but can't select a site to "migrate to". If the user can't select an option, then this option should not be displayed. Let's give the other moderators some time to see this question and hear what they know/have to say about this issue.

So far I flag the question and ask a moderator to move, but what is the preferred solution?

Flagging the question and asking a moderator to move it is the preferred solution. Arduino SE moderators may discuss questions with the other SE network moderators before we migrate a question to them.

Thanks, that's exactly what I did (and it already has been done by the moderators).

I'm inclined to agree with VE7JRO here. I'm a little opposed to questions being migrated on technicalities, however if it has to be done, then flagging for a moderator to do it is the way. If the question had contained an Arduino function call, then it might have been more ambiguous as to whether it belonged here or not.

Shouldn't the "flag/close/offtopic because/This question belongs on another site in the Stack Exchange network option" include the ability to choose another SE site? I seem to have the rep to point questions to the meta site, but not to an actual destination site. Given that close requests take several consensus votes before they actually take effect, this seems like it should let the voter pick a suggested destination SE site.

@DuncanC - One possible solution would be to Vote to Close with the Off-Topic reason, then flag the question with "in need of moderator intervention". Please let us know which site you would like it migrated to. I'm "pretty sure" that close votes are removed during the migration process, but you still should retain your "close vote count".

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


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.

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


text:
Can we change the close/reopen vote threshold from 5 to 3?
This SO Meta 'question' announces lowering of the close/reopen vote threshold from 5 to 3 on Stack Overflow.
The answer to a question in a comment if it applies to other SE sites is this link, but it doesn't really have the answer.
Do our moderators have more informations? Can we have a threshold of 3 votes?

There are a lot of 1st time posters who may take getting their question closed the wrong way and just leave for good.  I would be in favor of reducing the number of votes but only if the votes were accompanied by a (good) posted comment against the question voted to be closed.  If possible, I would even favor weighting the close votes.  Close votes with no attached comment = 1/5 votes needed to close.  Close votes with an attached comment = 1/3 votes needed to close.

@st2000, Stack Exchange changed the 'notices' about closing reason https://stackoverflow.blog/2019/12/05/new-post-notices-improving-feedback-on-stack-overflow-questions/

@st2000, there are never 5 close votes here on Arduino SE. usually moderator must help to close the garbage questions

I like the improvements in the linked-to stackoverflow blog.  I did not see where it addresses situations where people vote to close questions with no feed back to the original poster.  While I don't think it is fair to demand feed back, I do think rewarding it is fair game.

@st2000 - Every "On Hold" and "Closed" post always gave "feed back to the original poster". The wording of the reasons for on hold / closure has recently changed, and the background color changed from yellow to blue https://stackoverflow.blog/2019/12/05/new-post-notices-improving-feedback-on-stack-overflow-questions/ I believe comments are still active when a question is put on hold, and can be transferred to chat for an extended conversation. Comments / chat can be used to clarify the exact nature of the issue(s) with the question. A person voting to close can leave a comment if they choose.

@VE7JRO, when will the change happen?

@Juraj - The "test" I'm told started in January, and we should hear something after the end of the month. If we haven't heard anything by the middle of February, I will contact SO. This is a feature we really need. Most people are unaware that votes to close "age away" after 5 days. Let's say we get 4 VTC on a question, a week goes by, and voila, there are 0 VTC. This aging away of votes is OK for a busy network like EE, but for us it doesn't work very well.

@VE7JRO here are 4 close votes https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/71686/is-it-permissible-to-use-strlcpy-to-copy-an-array-to-itself

https://arduino.stackexchange.com/tools?tab=Close&daterange=last7days

@VE7JRO, the "Arduino uno wifi rev2 stuck inside loop." needs guidance, not solving. the OP asked more questions with the same sketch. some of them have accepted answers

the strcpy question is extremely common. the OP didn't try to google it

@VE7JRO, something new?

I think the community here is still quite small with only 177 users having 500+ reputation so they are able to cast close votes. How many questions are in the queues? Is it too much for moderators to get involved?

@ThomasWeller - I agree. And out of the 177, very few of those users "get involved". There may be 20 regular users who participate in these "maintenance" tasks. IMHO, giving the community the ability to close questions at 3 votes, rather than 5 votes, gives them more control, not less. I am in favour of this proposed change.

@ThomasWeller - There is a possibility that 3 users could join forces to abuse this new privilege (if we are approved for it). A simple flag for moderator attention by any user is all that's required to start an investigation (I sure hope users with 1 rep can flag a post). Whether 5 or 3 people voted to close a question, a single moderator vote can reopen it at any time.

@VE7JRO: I doubt it would be abused. Flagging is possible with 15 rep, which is indeed low. Unfortunately, new users won't know that this option exists and it's the right way to go. In other forums (non-SE), flagging is mostly considered as a harmful action like removing the post due to copyright violation, violence or similar.

@VE7JRO, something new?

@Juraj - Nothing new. Still waiting for SE.

https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/344586/our-commitment-to-responding-to-meta-and-moderators

@Juraj - I was just about to add a comment with the very same link :) On March 16th, I'll add that tag to this meta post and we'll see what happens. There have been a lot of "changes" at SE lately, so I know they have been very busy. Thanks for your patience.

@Juraj - Have a look at the "older questions" section of this document: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/345032/community-and-moderator-guidelines-for-escalating-issues-via-new-response-proces. Changing the VTC from 5 to 3 sounds like a "Community-specific concern" to me.

yes, yes, that is why I deleted the comment about new question only. we only want this one simple thing

@Juraj - I've added the status-review tag. Now we wait...

https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/347959/meta-escalation-response-process-update-march-april-2020-test-results-next-ste?cb=1

@Juraj - Yup, I read that a few days ago. There is nothing more I can do until a SE employee makes this change happen.

thank you @VE7JRO, I think about it

@JNat, this would really help us

Once you are elected as a moderator (https://arduino.stackexchange.com/election), the 3 or 5 vote issue will disappear. We still need the 3 vote to close to be implemented.

@VE7JRO, we have 3 vote close. they left it active even the test was planed to end in June. https://arduino.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2681/3-vote-close-hows-it-going

Some of you may have noticed the Meta Stack Exchange post - Testing three-vote close and reopen on 13 network sites (it's linked in the featured on meta sidebar) - we've finally got this project under way and Arduino is one of the sites we'll be running the test on.
Starting tomorrow, I'll be changing the site setting and closing and reopening will require only three votes. This test will run for 45 days and will be turned back to five votes to close and reopen while I review the data from the 13 sites. After we've seen the impact, I'll be posting results and, if there aren't negative impacts, we will change the setting to three permanently.
A few weeks into this, I'll be posting a question here on meta to ask for your thoughts about this change, so you will have an opportunity to discuss the impact.
Thank you so much for your patience while we got this prioritized and scheduled. There's a lot more information in the MSE post, so please review it.

yes I noticed it. thank you. I am curios for the outcome of the test, because now we have more users with close voting privllege than year and a half back when I opened this

It's good that y'all have more people with the privilege but I based this decision on your recent activity and y'all are handling less than half the questions that are flagged for closure - now, that could be because there's no one reviewing or because people are skipping a lot because they're not sure how to handle certain questions or any number of other things, so I'm hoping to capture some of that at the mid-test feedback opportunity.

back then it was completely hopeless to close a question without moderator :-)

I have some information regarding the process of changing the "close/reopen vote threshold".

We need a question on our meta site that discusses the merits of changing the required number of close and reopen votes.
Options are 5 votes, or 3 votes, or 1 vote.
Once our users have talked it through, we can get a one-month test started.

Let's see what our users and other site moderators have to say (we are all in different timezones).
In the mean time, how about an anonymous survey for the Arduino SE users. Please up vote one of the following comments you agree with.

Update 2020-02-04.
I spoke with a SE employee about this proposed change, and ask for your patience while they work through higher priority tasks. While we are waiting, there are some things we can do as a community:

Use the "Flagging" system to bring "problem" questions to the
moderators attention. Before I was elected as a moderator, I raised
640 flags in 640 days (35 were declined). If you see something wrong,
don't be afraid to flag it.
Vote to Close the question. You don't have to use the "canned
reasons". Select "off topic" then "other" to give us a description of
why you think the question should be closed.
Down vote the question. It doesn't "cost" you any rep, and it sends a
clear message to the community about the perceived value of the
question.
If you have the rep, and feel strongly about a question, do all of
the three previous suggestions.

Update 2019-12-11. Our site has been scheduled to have the test started some time in January. I’ll update this answer as more information becomes available.
Update 2020-01-13. There are 2 comments to Juraj’s question that should be discussed.

The first comment is regarding this Q+A:
  Is it permissible to use strlcpy to copy an array to itself?.

Right now it has a score of -3, with 4 Votes To Close (VTC). The question includes a sketch that compiles, however, it’s subject matter is a basic C++ question. As a user of Arduino SE, I dis-agree with closing the Q+A. As a moderator, I was elected to work for the community, so I will give it the 5th VTC. As a user, I’m sorry to say this to the 4 people who VTC, but I’m up-voting the question to try to give the OP some rep back, and I’m up-voting Edgar’s answer because he gave a great answer as usual. Unless this question gets up to at least 100 views in 5 days, the community robot will permanently delete it from the system.

The second comment deals with other questions. One of them has 3 VTC
  and the other has 2 VTC. Regarding the 3 VTC:
  https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/71290/how-can-i-get-the-esp32-to-be-a-webserver-in-addition-to-other-things.

It has a score of -1 (I gave it the -1 before the OP make 2 edits to improve it). The last comment indicates the OP is still "working on it", so I will VTC. This question can still be edited and will show up in the Reopen Votes: https://arduino.stackexchange.com/review. Of course, any user, can leave a comment on any question, (or flag it) at any time, and say "I have an answer. Please re-open the question".

The question with 2 VTC:
  Arduino uno wifi rev2 stuck inside loop.

I can see the OP is a "New contributor" to our network, so extra patience is expected from our community. There seems to be multiple languages used here (English, German, Dutch). Arduino SE is an "English" site, however, we have a global audience with users who speak everything except English. I can only imagine how difficult it would be to teach yourself another language, just so you could ask for help on the Arduino SE network.
Some of the things I don’t like about this Q+A. There is a lot of discussion in the question’s comments. The comments should be moved to chat, which I will do. The use of the additional languages creates extra work for the community. I used Google Translate to verify that none of the comments, code comments, and language in the image were offensive (in English).
For now, I’ll add this question to my list, and watch for further VTC. If we are approved for the 3 VTC proposal, then one more VTC will close it. I won’t like it, but if that is the wishes of the community, so be it.

YES: Change the close/reopen vote threshold from 5 to 3.

YES: Change the close/reopen vote threshold from 5 to 1.

NO: Do Not Change the close/reopen vote threshold. Leave it at 5.


text:
2019: a year in moderation
It's New Year's Day in Stack Exchange land...
A distinguishing characteristic of these sites is how they are moderated:

We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.
  -- A Theory of Moderation

While there certainly are Moderators here, a significant amount of the moderation is done by ordinary people, using the privileges
they've earned by virtue of their contributions to the site. Each of you contributes a little bit of time and effort, and together you accomplish much.
As we enter a new year, let's pause and reflect, taking a moment to appreciate the work that we do here together.
And what could be more festive than a big pile of numbers?
So here is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Arduino over the past 12 months:
                 Action                  Moderators Community¹
---------------------------------------- ---------- ----------
Users suspended²                                  1          6
Users destroyed³                                 15          0
Users deleted                                     4          0
Users contacted                                   6          0
Tasks reviewed⁴: Suggested Edit queue           266      1,214
Tasks reviewed⁴: Reopen Vote queue               50        311
Tasks reviewed⁴: Low Quality Posts queue         90        754
Tasks reviewed⁴: Late Answer queue               72        596
Tasks reviewed⁴: First Post queue             1,174      2,451
Tasks reviewed⁴: Close Votes queue              290      3,493
Questions unprotected                             3          0
Questions reopened                               24          5
Questions protected                             141         26
Questions migrated                               36          0
Questions flagged⁵                                0        858
Questions closed                                720        668
Question flags handled⁵                         158        700
Posts unlocked                                    2          6
Posts undeleted                                   5         56
Posts locked                                      5        155
Posts deleted⁶                                  598      2,586
Posts bumped                                      0      2,191
Comments undeleted                                3          0
Comments flagged                                  0        643
Comments deleted⁷                               791      2,679
Comment flags handled                           106        537
Answers flagged                                   1      1,346
Answer flags handled                          1,200        147
All comments on a post moved to chat             36          0

Footnotes
¹ "Community" here refers both to the membership of Arduino without diamonds next to their names, and to the automated systems otherwise known as user #-1.
² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.
³ A "destroyed" user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.
⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.
⁵ Includes close flags (but not close or reopen votes).
⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.
⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).
Further reading:

Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? I posted a similar report here last year: 2018: a year in moderation...
You can also check out this report on other sites
Or peruse detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites

Wishing you all a happy new year...

thank you. could the user#-1 have a separate column?


text:
Pin 13 chat room is frozen
A moderator can unfreeze it?

(and the question wizard requires some more text)

Ok, try it now...

I left you a test message in the Pin 13 chat room.

and the question wizard requires some more text

What is the "question wizard"?

it was just a dummy text because so short question is not allowed

still frozen. the field to enter a new message is missing. I added a screenshot to question


text:
A little survey (for those that can be bothered to read Meta)
A simple one really:

What is the most important thing you look for when choosing an Arduino-compatible development board?

Do you even look for anything specific, or do you just automatically plump for the "default"? Is there any specific feature set you need? Is size important? Price? Processing power? Memory? IO pin count?

Your question is not quite clear to me Arduino-compatible development board means can be programmed via ArduinoIDE / is a clone of the official Arduino boards/designs or it can be used with the Arduino C++ flavour to be programmed with. So is an ESP32cam an Arduino compatible board

Yes, anything that can be programmed through the Arduino IDE and bought off the shelf. So sure ESP32 cam is included.

I guess I'd say "it depends on what's needed for the project", but that's not really an answer.

I look for documentation, such as on-line specifications, including a datasheet with detailed specifications, pinouts, and sample circuits/implementations.

I search for maximum features I need for the project and minimum features I don't need.

Great answer. +1. Personally, I only build things that are "smart enough" to do the job that they were designed to do. For example, why pay for WiFi if you don't need it. No one can "hack" the WiFi on a Pro Mini because it doesn't have it "built in".

If it is an Uno or Mega, then I try to ensure (by checking with the vendor first) that it doesn't use a CH340.
Many vendors show an image of a standard Uno/Mega with a 16U2 but when it arrives it's got a CH340(G)... which are a right pain when working from a Mac (even though I do have PCs as well).

I personally go for hassle free boards for the end user:

USB plug with a standard chip/driver for Win/MacOS/Linux
Silk screen with pin# and clear print for "dangerous" pins like VCC.
As minimum

WiFi support/
2MB Flash min or SD card slot to enable storing of html/data

Possibility for battery power (lion plug/loader included) with energy saving features supported by the design
A CPU strong enough for the usage scenario (trade off power vs energy consumption is hard to achieve)
AND a good end user documentation (pictures / easy to read text) at least in english :-)

Depending on the usage (ranked by experiance):

Max I/Os (multi purpose digital/analoge)
flexible pin assignment HW-Serial(s)/SPI/I2C
additional hardware plugs for e.g. camera, sensors, etc
BLE / NFC and other features onboard

and a feature which helps in dev

a system base for motors/servos with H-bridges and external power plug
at least a breakout base with enough pins/plugs to attach sensor modules to


text:
Is syntax highlighting broken?
I usually use fenced code blocks in order to get code
syntax-highlighted, as in
```c++
some C++ source
```

This used to work for quite some time. However, since a couple of days
or so, it looks like it doesn't work anymore.
Examples: here and here.
The weird thing is: while editing, the syntax highlighting does work in
the preview... sometimes!
Did I do something wrong? Is this feature deprecated? Is it just a
glitch in the Matrix?

2020-06-17: Arduino Stack Exchange was migrated to CommonMark. use ```cpp

I removed the c++ in the first question, and now the syntax highlighting is working.
If it worked before (with the c++), my best guess is Stack Exchange made some changes in the back end.
There is another way to force syntax highlighting for all code blocks in a particular Q or A.
<!-- language-all: lang-cpp -->

There is more information here: Markdown help, and according to this page, the c++ should work.
Clearly there is something wrong or something changed. I'll see what I can find out...

Thanks! I knew about this option, but I find it somewhat clumsy. I prefer fenced code blocks and have been using them since I noticed stackexchange started supporting them.

You might also need to add a space ``` cpp - it's another commonmark thing

As mentioned by VE7JRO, the language can be specified using a
specially-formatted HTML comment.
For those who prefer the more standard “fenced code blocks”, my tests
show they still work when the fence is labeled cpp or lang-cpp, but
not with the labels c++ or lang-c++:
```cpp
for (int i = 0; i < 42; i++)  // be insistent
    Serial.println("Hello!");
```

is rendered:
for (int i = 0; i < 42; i++)  // be insistent
    Serial.println("Hello!");

Edit: This may be the cause of the issue:
We're switching to CommonMark.


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:
How to avoid having my posts flagged as spam or self-promotion?
How do I make references to my own products (eg. circuit boards) or libraries, without having my post flagged as spam or self-promotion?

Disclose affiliation

The link or mention should be relevant to the question

You must disclose your affiliation. For example: "My web site xyz.com sells boards that do what you want".

Links to external sites are OK
See How do I write a good answer?:

Provide context for links

Links to external resources are encouraged, but please add context around the link so your fellow users will have some idea what it is and why it’s there. Always quote the most relevant part of an important link, in case the target site is unreachable or goes permanently offline.

Note that answers should be, as far as practical, self-contained. An answer that just has a link in it will be useless if the target site goes down, possibly permanently.
Stack Exchange is supposed to be a site with answers to questions. Not links to answers to questions.
In some cases (eg. libraries) this may be impractical. In that case hosting your library on a site that is likely to be around indefinitely (like GitHub) is preferable.

Avoid overt self-promotion
See How to not be a spammer

Don't talk about your product / website / book / job too much. Folks will read your answers for their ability to solve a specific problem; if you're good at doing that, then they'll find themselves more interested in who you are and what you're working on. If you respond only to questions where the answer can be something you're selling, they'll assume you're just here to sell.

Don't include links except to support what you've written. Links are not a substitute for including information in your answer itself, and links should always be directly relevant to a part of your answer.

In other words, if every post you make references your web site, and your web site is selling something, or is full of ads, people will think you are only here to drive traffic to your site. Avoid that by making most of your answers stand alone, and only refer to your own site where this is directly relevant.

Avoid appearing to force people to pay for your answer
If you answer a question, and the answer includes a library, and you link to that library (and it is required to implement the answer) then the library must be freely available, and not hidden behind a paywall or requirement to divulge personal information like an email address.
If you solicit a donation for downloading the library, then it must be made clear that the donation is not required. For example: "Enter a donation amount of $0 if you do not wish to donate".

How to solicit donations
On your own website, preferably separate attempts to make money from the information on your personal site. For example, have a separate "Donate" button (eg. using PayPal) which is not required to be used before downloading your library. Or suggest people support you on Patreon or other similar sites.
Of course, you can run your own web site as you see fit. But links from Stack Exchange to a site that does not follow these guidelines may be flagged as self-promotion or spam.


text:
Is there a generic way to add default Arduino syntax highlighting to every post in the whole Arduino Stack Exchange?
You can do this (preferred):
<!-- language-all: lang-arduino -->

or this:
<!-- language-all: lang-cpp -->

to the top of every question or answer to set syntax highlighting for that entire question or answer, or this just for the code block that follows:
Code block 1:
<!-- language: lang-arduino -->

    void setup()
    {
        Serial.begin(115200);
        // some more code
    }

Code block 2:
<!-- language: lang-bash -->

    # random examples
    arduino-cli help core
    grep 'some regular expression' /some/file

but shouldn't this be turned on by default for the entire Arduino Stack Exchange instead?
Samples:
Here's what the above 2 code blocks look like, just for demonstration purposes:
Code block 1:
void setup()
{
    Serial.begin(115200);
    // some more code
}

Code block 2:
# random examples
arduino-cli help core
grep 'some regular expression' /some/file

References:

Syntax highlighting language hints

I completely agree that Syntax colouring makes the code much more readable, particularly for people who are new to coding.
I usually add the C++ language directive just above the code block to activate syntax-highlighting for the code:
<!-- language-all: lang-C++ -->

For serial monitor output, error messages and the like, you do not want syntax highlighting (but you do want it to display in the grey "code" box). You can disable the highlighting by placing this above the code block:
<!-- language-all: lang-none -->

Alternatively you could use backticks to indicate the start and end of a code block:
```cpp
void setup()
{
    Serial.begin(115200);
    // some more code
}
```

will look like this
void setup()
{
    Serial.begin(115200);
    // some more code
}

For sections where you do not want syntax highlighting, you can disable the highlighting by placing a normal code block.

The advantage of the c++ tag is that both the question and the answer get syntax hylighting without needing to add any directives.

Yes, but what language? Your examples shows two: C++ and bash.
Some code blocks show output from the terminal monitor which should not (generally) be coloured at all.
If you tag your question with the C++ tag that it gets the C++ (ie. Arduino) colouring automatically.

I was just thinking we by default do Arduino (C++) syntax highlighting, and require manually setting it for anything else. Alternatively, I suppose we could just tag every question with Arduino code in it with the C++ tag? Or, what is preferred?

Some people even post (ugh.....) python.

One thing that I have often wondered about... do the question tags affect the syntax highlighting in answers...?

It appears to, yes. See here as an example. Neither the question nor the answer have the special "language" comments, but both are syntax-highlighted (and the question has the C++ tag).

What is preferred? - I usually tag questions with code in them with the C++ tag, but have been ticked off in the past because the "question is not about C++". Perhaps, but if it has C++ code in it I think the tag is reasonable. After all, people who want to (or are able to) answer questions about C++ syntax may well search for such tags.


text:
Changes to the Arduino moderation team
It is with great sadness that we have to say goodbye to VE7JRO in the moderator team. We thank him for the sterling work he has done during his tenure as moderator and wish him all the best.
As a result a moderator election will shortly be called. If you think you might be able to fill his shoes, watch this space.

I see Nick Gammon is active on Arduino SE again.

I just wanted to take a moment to say thank you to VE7JRO for all the time and effort you've spent on moderating Arduino:SE.  It really is appreciated.
Good luck with whatever you are going to be doing next.


text:
Can I post this question in the main site?
We are a small team working on a free open source Arduino playground. We would like to collect feedback from Arduino enthusiasts as well as beginners to make our project more useful. hence, we are very much interested to listen to the use cases, user wishes or needs, feedback on the simulator, and feature feedback.
is it possible to ask the question on the main site so that we can reach more Arduino users?
Here is the links of the project:
https://wokwi.com/arduino/libraries
https://github.com/wokwi/arduino-libraries

No. The main site is not a place for soliciting feedback for projects - it is a place for obtaining help with specific problems you may be having.
There's nothing stopping you asking on Meta - though the audience is considerably smaller, so the results may be pretty meaningless.

is here a possibility for moderator to add [featured] tag to show the meta question on the right yellow bar on main?

Meta is really for "questions about the site" - I don't see how this is really a question about the site.

@Juraj Nah, I don't think so. That would be no different to posting on the main site really. And yeah, Nick, I do agree with that - but moderation is much looser here as there are only about 4 people who ever read meta...

You, me, Juraj, and who is the 4th? :)

I suggest you post on the Arduino Forum, possibly in Gigs and Collaborations, Products and Services or Exhibition / Gallery (but only one of those).


text:
Arduino IDE boards master list
I'm compiling a "master list" of board packages for the Arduino IDE.
At the moment I have:

Adafruit

https://adafruit.github.io/arduino-board-index/package_adafruit_index.json

BBC Microbit etc

https://sandeepmistry.github.io/arduino-nRF5/package_nRF5_boards_index.json

chipKIT

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/chipKIT32/chipKIT-core/master/package_chipkit_index.json

Digistump

http://digistump.com/package_digistump_index.json

ESP32

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/espressif/arduino-esp32/gh-pages/package_esp32_index.json

ESP8266

https://arduino.esp8266.com/stable/package_esp8266com_index.json

Little Green LGT8fx

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dbuezas/lgt8fx/master/package_lgt8fx_index.json

Maixduino

http://dl.sipeed.com/MAIX/Maixduino/package_Maixduino_k210_index.json

Open Panzer TCB

https://openpanzerproject.github.io/OpenPanzerBoards/package_openpanzer_index.json

Seeeduino

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Seeed-Studio/Seeed_Platform/master/package_seeeduino_boards_index.json

Sparkfun Boards

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sparkfun/Arduino_Boards/master/IDE_Board_Manager/package_sparkfun_index.json

STM32Duino

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stm32duino/BoardManagerFiles/master/STM32/package_stm_index.json

If anyone knows of any more (the more obscure the better, even if it's just for one single board) please let me know in answers / comments.

https://github.com/per1234/ino-hardware-package-list

@Juraj Oooh, nice find. Thanks for that one.

Of course it will take some work going through all those looking for the links to the board installation JSON file where available. Many are grouped into a single file, like the Adafruit ones...

I did know about this list. Per is very active in Arduino community mainly on Arduino forum and recently he even started to work for Arduino. He writes documentation (CLI afalk). But he avoids Arduino SE for some reason.

Well, it's a great resource. Basically I'm looking to (eventually) migrate UECIDE to using (at least sometimes) arduino-cli as the compilation back-end, and want to have a way of selecting the boards / cores without you having to go hunting for them.

the CLI has boards manager services too. and it can run as RPC server (daemon)

Yes. But you still need to know the JSON file URLs. That's what I want to avoid.

the json links, right. there is no index of then anywhere. they are always mentioned in readme only

@Juraj Yeah. That file you link to has many of them, but not all. And some are b0rken too.

Is this one? For Sanguino: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Lauszus/Sanguino/master/package_lauszus_sanguino_index.json. I think that's for a 3D Printing board, I think, can't remember, I may have some others.


text:
11 downvotes in a few weeks - what am I doing wrong?
My question is very related to:
6 downvotes in 6 days - what am I doing wrong?
However, I have 11 downvotes in about two weeks.
The answer given (I upvoted them), but seem not to be related to my questions because:

I'm not a newcomer at StackExchange
Most questions have (multiple) upvotes
For none, there is a reason added
Some of the questions are very old
I never had so many downvotes in such a short time (unless for a single question just asked, which I either removed or improved).

Meaning, it's not 'bad luck'. I just think it's somebody picking on me. Now I don't care if it cost me 20 or 100 points, but if he also downvotes other people who are new, they might cause people to stop using StackOverflow sites, and for me it was and still is an invaluable source of information.

the downvote on answer to syntax error question is my. it is only to zero the votes count so the question is deleted later by the system. the downvotes on your questions are not OK

@Juraj I don't mind to have a downvote for a bad answer (actually it's good, keeping the quality high).

@Juraj do you mean the answer for https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/78013/the-error-shows-ir-sensor541-error-expected-unqualified-id-before-token/78014#78014 ? I think the answer is correct, but would fit better at StackOverflow. But in that case a change of the question and answer to that forum would be better, and not a downvote.

it would be off-topic on SO because it is a syntax error. so it is off-topic here too in my opinion

@Juraj Yes I agree, but then I rather would have it moved without downvoting as the answer is correct/helpful. I will flag the question.

again. it is off-topic on SO. they will not accept the move. trivial questions must be off-topic on Q&A site. for example movie identification questions are off topic on Movies Stack Exchange

@Juraj sorry know I know the issue, you mean questions about a syntax error should not be added at all... I will remove my answer and the question can be removed. Now I understand the downvoting. Thanks for the clarification.

Looking at your reputation changes over time it certainly does look like someone is out to get you. From the 21st of August there is just a constant stream of down votes and not much else.
Unfortunately we cannot see who is voting, but there are systems in place to identify serial voting by one person and reverse them. But that hasn't been triggered, so I guess it's not just one person picking on you - either that or it's one person who knows how to game the system.
There are people around who think that programming questions are off-topic here, even if that programming is for an Arduino, and a number of your down votes could be put in that category, but not all of them.
Is it just "bad luck"? That's not really possible to tell. The questions in question (questionception?) are mostly quite old, though, so they've either been stumbled across in a general search (but why would there be so many together then?) or someone has actively gone through your list of questions.
Certainly it does seem on balance that it's someone malicious.
Unfortunately there's nothing we as moderators can actively do about it, other than passing it up the chain to the system admins to investigate.


text:
Trivial questions must be off-topic
The Meta sites associated with Stack Exchange sites are full of discussions about on-topic/off-topic and what is a question worth to answer and stay. Arduino SE is a technical SE site and a large part of questions are about coding. So we can look for directions at Meta of the Stack Overflow (SO), the first and largest SE site. Even there the discussion continues, but some things are clear which here aren't.
One thing are trivial questions. In coding these are questions with missing braces, questions with typos in code, other syntax error questions, questions with 'code blindness'. These are off-topic on SO and off-topic on Arduino SE simply because they are pure coding questions (which should be asked on SO).
Then there are questions which, only after clarifying the details in comments, turn out to be trivial. This are sometimes closed on SO as 'not reproducible', because the problem went away.
These questions shouldn't be answered, if they are answered the answer shouldn't be upvoted. This allows the cleaning process nick-named Roomba (as the cleaning robot) to delete later this question + answers.
So we can help the seeker of an answer to a trivial question in comments or even in answers, but let the Roomba delete it later.
The example of trivial question for electronics would be, I think, a ground not connected where it definitely should be or 'not working' unpowered device.
One example outside of technical SE and not clear first for an outsider is that on Movies SE, movie identification questions are off-topic. If someone asks "I saw long time ago this movie where .... Do you know the title?", they close it, because the site would be full of this if they didn't. But of course they put the title in a comment.

This question is probably a reaction to a comment I made on a (now deleted by the author) post, in which I said that comments under questions are not for answering questions.
I referenced this post: How do comments work
Stack Exchange is not a forum and is not intended for ephemeral questions (like, "how do I fix this trivial issue") which are answered in comments and then deleted by the author. You can use a forum for that, and in particular The Arduino Forum.
Either one of two things will be true:

The question is a good question. It deserves an answer, and the question and answer(s) will stand to help people in the future. Like a knowledge-base. In this case make an answer. Other people may make different answers. People vote on the answers. The highest-voted answer will float to the top. The person asking the question will hopefully "accept" one of the answers.

The question is not a good question. It should not be answered in a comment. It should be downvoted, and eventually closed and deleted.

I have a Meta post How to ask a good question for Arduino Stack Exchange. You can reference that.
If the question is borderline useful (for keeping) then you can improve it yourself. Perhaps change from a very specific example to a more general example.
You could also make your own reference question that covers the points raised, but not the specific example, and explains in some detail how to resolve this particular point.

Attempts to answer in comments, and allow the user to delete the question, basically turn you into an unpaid consultant. No-one else is helped, because the question is then either deleted by the OP, or auto-deleted as you seem to be suggesting is a good idea.

"Comments are used to ask for clarification or to point out problems in the post." the code could have other problem then the trivial one. the user didn't know it is a trivial question. I think it was a case o 'code blindness'. on comment the user fixed the problem pointed in the comment and there was no other problem. case closed.

"Problems in the post" is different to the problem being posted about. A problem in the post would be grammar, spelling, punctuation, formatting of code, incomplete statement of the issue, not enough information and so on. This isn't referring to a "trivial problem being asked". If the problem is a missing semicolon in the code (say) then either make an answer pointing that out, or vote to close the question as being too trivial to be asked.

the SO community didn't make the rule for fun. there is experience behind it. many times the trivial errors in code are only remains of debugging attempts and there is a real problem in the Question. so clearing trivial errors is clearing problems with the post. there should be no trivial errors in the post. if after clearing trivial problems there is no other problem, case closed. how many times OP doesn't write in wiring description that they have the grounds connected? do you want every time to write an answer about grounds not connected?

How many times do I have to say this, I wonder? As per this Meta SO post comments are not for answering a question. You can't spin that around and say that you can answer trivial questions in a comment. The whole model breaks down if you answer questions in comments. No-one can vote the "answer" down or up. No-one can suggest improvements to your "answer". If the question is really trivial vote it down - don't answer it. You are training people to use SE as a quick syntax-error solving forum.

I didn't answer the question. I pointed out a trivial error in he code snippet. I can't know if it is the only problem since it is too obvious

The "No answer in a comment" rule is not optimally formulated (IMHO). In the case of trivial or low value questions it has the effect of forcing a formal answer, in the worst case, reams of text saying something blindingly obvious, or leaving the OP without any form of response until the question is automatically deleted. Neither are particularly satisfactory. Why not use the comment to give a response to help the OP say a quick fix, a more focused search phrase for the OP to try, or a recommendation for another forum. Maybe also including a signal to other potential responders and downvote.

If you are going to write 50 words as a comment to answer the question, I don't see the difference between typing the same 50 words into the answer box. Then the system considers the question answered, and we don't keep getting reminded a year or two later that this question doesn't have an answer.

If you think the question is hopelessly bad, don't answer, or vote it down, or flag it for migration or deletion. But don't answer it in the comments. It is explicitly disallowed here.


text:
Suspicious upvotes
User dannyf gets every day since October upvotes on three to five old answers. That makes around 2400 points in two months.
I flagged the last upvoted answer but the flag was declined maybe because my description of the problem was too short.
EDIT: I noticed it as I visited the Users page and Majenko was not first there as always. (I was on the way to Majeko's profile for the Evils of String link.) So I was curios what good answers the user wrote to get so many points this month.

@Majenko, the upvotes continue

This has been raised with the powers that be.

Update: Your suspicions were correct and the votes have been reversed.

there is a new case. per1234 gets 3 upvotes on old answers almost every day. I know Per from arduino forum and I am 100% sure he is not doing it. it must be a fan.

and dannyf again

now Edgar gets too many upvotes on old questions. somebody is playing with SE

now Peter Bloomfield has 3 upvotes every day


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:
2020: a year in moderation

As we say goodbye to the old year and welcome the new one, we have a tradition of sharing moderation stats for the past 12 months.
As most of you here are aware, sites on the Stack Exchange network are moderated somewhat differently to other sites on the web:

We designed the Stack Exchange network engine to be mostly self-regulating, in that we amortize the overall moderation cost of the system across thousands of teeny-tiny slices of effort contributed by regular, everyday users.
-- A Theory of Moderation

That doesn't eliminate the need for having moderators altogether, but it does mean that the bulk of moderation work is carried out by regular folks. Every bit of time and effort y'all contribute to the site gives you access to more privileges you can use to help in this effort, all of which produce a cumulative effect that makes a big difference.
So as we welcome 2021, and in keeping with tradition, let us look back at what we accomplished as a community... by looking at some exciting stats. Below is a breakdown of moderation actions performed on Arduino over the past 12 months:

Action
Moderators
Community¹

Users suspended²
6
9

Users destroyed³
8
0

Users contacted
12
0

User suspensions lifted early
2
0

Tasks reviewed⁴: Suggested Edit queue
219
617

Tasks reviewed⁴: Reopen Vote queue
86
118

Tasks reviewed⁴: Low Quality Posts queue
146
305

Tasks reviewed⁴: Late Answer queue
70
437

Tasks reviewed⁴: First Post queue
1,256
1,255

Tasks reviewed⁴: Close Votes queue
332
869

Tag synonyms proposed
0
1

Revisions redacted
2
0

Questions unprotected
1
0

Questions reopened
15
0

Questions protected
98
12

Questions migrated
38
0

Questions merged
1
0

Questions flagged⁵
2
152

Questions closed
758
72

Question flags handled⁵
116
38

Posts unlocked
10
19

Posts undeleted
5
48

Posts locked
24
52

Posts deleted⁶
482
1,533

Posts bumped
0
2,128

Escalations to the Community Manager team
2
0

Comments undeleted
1
0

Comments flagged
2
56

Comments deleted⁷
844
1,677

Comment flags handled
48
10

Answers flagged
63
590

Answer flags handled
598
55

All comments on a post moved to chat
42
0

Footnotes
¹ "Community" here refers both to the membership of Arduino without diamonds next to their names, and to the automated systems otherwise known as user #-1.
² The system will suspend users under three circumstances: when a user is recreated after being previously suspended, when a user is recreated after being destroyed for spam or abuse, and when a network-wide suspension is in effect on an account.
³ A "destroyed" user is deleted along with all that they had posted: questions, answers, comments. Generally used as an expedient way of getting rid of spam.
⁴ This counts every review that was submitted (not skipped) - so the 2 suggested edits reviews needed to approve an edit would count as 2, the goal being to indicate the frequency of moderation actions. This also applies to flags, etc.
⁵ Includes close flags (but not close or reopen votes).
⁶ This ignores numerous deletions that happen automatically in response to some other action.
⁷ This includes comments deleted by their own authors (which also account for some number of handled comment flags).
Further reading:

Wanna see how these numbers have changed over time? We posted a similar report here last year: 2019: a year in moderation

You can also check out this report on other sites

Or peruse detailed information on the number of questions closed and reopened across all sites

A big thank you to Shog9 for writing the queries and script to facilitate fetching and posting this data to all the sites in the network, and to Brian for the subsequent work making the whole thing more user friendly.
Wishing everyone a happy 2021!

regarding moderation https://arduino.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2633/can-we-change-the-close-reopen-vote-threshold-from-5-to-3


text:
Arduino SE and cross-posts: How to do community moderation?
I flagged a cross-post for moderator attention and the flag was declined with "flags should only be used to make moderators aware of content that requires their intervention".
What would be the right way to handle it?
I acted based on this SO Meta post: https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/255649/is-so-se-crosspost-accepted

In this instance I took the decision that the post was at home here and the post on the other site should be closed.
Just because a post exists on more than one site it doesn't always follow that this site should have the question closed.

ok, but does it mean that the flag is automatically declined?

No, it means I declined it.

why did you decline it?

For the reasons I stated in my answer. I felt the one on ASE should be the one to stay since it was on topic here.


text:
I have messed up my question what should I do now?
I have asked question recently in Arduino Stack exchange but I forgot to specify the problem clearly. I thought it is a problem with the Arduino's serial.read(). Seems like the question belongs to Super User or Electrical stack exchange. What should I do?
I was going to delete the question but the question has answers now but the answers did not help. I see this question more into Serial communication. Also I have seen many users having the kind of same problem in reddit and Arduino forums.
The question may not have a answer at all, it may be old devices (Versastat II) are not compatible with modern devices. I have fully edited the question after the two answers, which is bad indeed, afterwards added the full problem scenario..
Should I delete the question and repost? Help!
Thank you
Question
How to read incoming HEX values from Serial.read() method?

the question has answers now but the answers did not help

Your question is detailed, and the answers seem to be trying to help you.
I don't think deleting the question will help. I suggest trying to work with the people that are answering you and try to work your way to a solution.

seems like the question belongs to Super User or Electrical stack exchange

Certainly not Super User. I think you should stay here and work out the issue.

If your question has changed, it is better to leave the original question as is and ask a new question. That way the answers to the original question stay relevant.


text:
3-vote close - how's it going?
UPDATE: While the testing period has ended, this change has been well-received by the community so we have opted to not reset the votes needed to close/reopen to 5 while we look at data.
Please let me know if you have any concerns about this change in the planned process or if you feel the number of votes should be changed back at least temporarily. I'll be back in a few weeks with the results of the project.

Part of understanding the impact of three-vote closure is to understand what impact it's having on y'all. I'd like to ask anyone who feels up to it to write an answer to this question and to tell us about your experience over the past few weeks.
The sorts of things I'm interested in knowing (feel free to address all or none or add your own) -

Did this help?
Did it hurt?
Did it make you more interested in close/reopen reviewing? Less?

Are there things other than 3-vote close impacting your interest in reviewing?

If you can't vote but do flag, did this make you more/less likely to flag?
Would you prefer to go back to 5?
Should it be permanent?
What would you like me to look into when it comes to analyzing the data from the test?
Were there any side-effects (good or bad) that you want me to be aware of?

These are merely prompts, so feel free to add anything I'm missing that you think is worth saying. This is focused on how you're feeling about it and what data you want me to look at, so don't feel like you need to analyze the data over the last 30 days - though you're welcome to if that's how you figure out what you feel.
If you have any outstanding questions, also feel welcome to ask them here.
The test will run until about Monday the 21st of June, at which point we'll be resetting the votes to close up to 5 while I review the responses here and dig into the data that we've been collecting.

Hi Catija, could SE.3D Printing be considered for a three vote limit, when/if it is introduced?  We have had an unofficial vote on it, and most voters are in favour of the three vote limit (5-1 in favour). Please see Does this 3D Printing site want only three votes to close (or should we stick with five)?. Thanks.

@Greenonline I've just added the status-review tag - as a note, any time there's a request y'all want to bring to our attention that needs staff review (whether that's a feature request or a bug report, ect) add the status-review tag to it and we'll try to get back to you.

I think it's been positive. With the lower numbers this site has often seen questions sitting on 3 or 4 close votes and hanging there (until we mods closed them). Now we're seeing things naturally close more often, which is good.

Would you prefer to go back to 5?

no

Should it be permanent?

yes

Did it make you more interested in close/reopen reviewing?

yes
Thank you


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:
2021 Community Moderator Election
The 2021 Community Moderator Election is now underway!
Community moderator elections have three phases:

Nomination phase
Primary phase
Election phase

Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are.
Please visit the official election page at
https://arduino.stackexchange.com/election
for more detail, and to participate!
If you have general questions about the election process, or questions for moderator candidates, feel free to ask them here on meta -- just make sure your questions are tagged election.


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 :)