Sure, here is an example. The accepted answer doesn’t really answer the question. Mine finally got an equal number of votes, but is not accepted. Essentially, this is voting on physics, which is not a good way to find engineering solutions.
https://ham.stackexchange.com/questions/337/why-do-concurrent-fm-signals-not-mix-together/427 <https://ham.stackexchange.com/questions/337/why-do-concurrent-fm-signals-not-mix-together/427> Also, the back and forth to clarify the question is harder to do at Stack Overflow. Finally, I only visit forum sites when I absolutely have to. I've had all the discussions coming to one place since the early 1980’s, with Usenet. Visiting one site per topic is a crazy waste of time. I maintained the internal forums and Notesfiles software at HP for about ten years (before the WWW), so I’m pretty aware of discussions that don’t work right. wunder Walter Underwood wun...@wunderwood.org http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > On May 10, 2017, at 8:49 AM, Karl-Philipp Richter <krich...@posteo.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > Am 10.05.2017 um 17:03 schrieb Walter Underwood: >> I have contributed some answers in the amateur radio group. Stack Overflow >> has a bad >> tendency to get stuck on the earliest “might be right” answer, even if it is >> wrong. Very >> frustrating. This happens a lot with questions about antennas. > I can imagine this, but it's hard to follow without an example - not > necessary because there's no need to discuss the ups and downs of > stackexchange (!= stackoverflow) sites. If a Q&A frustates you - and > you're active on mailing lists - then you must have stubled over a lot > of pretty rare issues ;) > > -Kalle >
