# Bad electrical advice, Part II **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 13, 2002, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587 "2002-11-13T15:55:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2002, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/1 "2002-11-13T15:55:24Z")
A few months ago I compained here about bad, even dangerous, advice being offered on this board. And got a big “Yawn”. I draw your attention to [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=143882). Like I said before, someone’s going to get hurt and the SDMB might end up paying for it. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2002, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/2 "2002-11-14T00:10:57Z")
Well, apparently the OP, Dinsdale, is a lawyer, so at least he won’t have to worry about hiring one when his floor lamp catches on fire because he exceeded the “_wattage_” recommended by the manufacturer. 😛 Happy to Copy and Paste Coldfire’s response to you in the [other thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=130395): > [@](#): > > Fear not! The rule you wish for is already in place, albeit in a more general form. > > From our registration agreement: > > > [@](#): > > > > You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the SDMB to post any material that is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, threatening, invasive of a person’s privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. > > Now, the key lies in the word “knowingly”, of course. But when it’s about clear-cut cases such as telling someone to potentially expose himself to 220 volts (or 110 for you American pantsies ), that caveat just does not apply. > > In individual cases that you feel should be pointed out, just use the “Report this post to a moderator” link at the bottom of the offending post. The relevant mods will then promptly receive an e-mail. Feel free to continue the discussion as to whether using a 25 watt bulb in a 15 watt-rated socket is potentially life-threatening, bearing in mind that an EZ Bake Oven[sup]R[/sup], rated as “safe” for children age 8 and up, requires a whopping 60 watts. ---
**Author:** ![rowrrbazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rowrrbazzle/32/414_2.png) [@rowrrbazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rowrrbazzle)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2002, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/3 "2002-11-14T01:12:43Z")
The registration agreement also contains this language for people who read the board: > [@](#): > > We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. Users should be particularly wary of medical, legal or other professional advice posted on the message boards and recognize that it is no substitute for in-person consultation with a competent professional. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of the Chicago Reader, Inc., or any entity associated with it. Then there’s this for posters: > [@](#): > > You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the Chicago Reader, Inc. (the operator of this BB), Jelsoft Enterprises Limited (the makers of the bulletin board software), and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s). I’m not a lawyer, but I think the SDMB is covered. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2002, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/4 "2002-11-14T07:45:09Z")
Hmm, Ducky, I was with you till this. > [@](#): > > Feel free to continue the discussion as to whether using a 25 watt bulb in a 15 watt-rated socket is potentially life-threatening, bearing in mind that an EZ Bake Oven[sup]R[/sup], rated as “safe” for children age 8 and up, requires a whopping 60 watts. That’s not the same issue at all. The complaint has nothing to do with the touch temperature of the bulbs and possibility of handling, etc. It is a question of the capability of the wiring, switch, other electrical components to handle the combined electrical load and not burn up. An Easy-Bake oven is rated for a 60W bulb. My halogen lamp is rated for a 150 W bulb. Different designs, different capabilities, both perfectly safe if used as intended. And what you should get from the Easy-Bake is not that 60 W is safe because it’s used in a toy, but that it’s hot because you can bake with it. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2002, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/5 "2002-11-14T18:50:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rowrrbazzle \* > I’m not a lawyer, but I think the SDMB is covered. Well do we want to avoid a lawsuit, or do we want to avoid someone getting killed? ---
**Author:** ![rowrrbazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rowrrbazzle/32/414_2.png) [@rowrrbazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rowrrbazzle)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2002, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/6 "2002-11-14T21:31:35Z")
The best way to accomplish both parts of your question is for all SDMB users to read the registration agreement carefully and understand it, including the excerpts I’ve posted. Those excerpts in particular are just good common sense, useful in all areas of life. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2002, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/7 "2002-11-15T06:25:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ftg \* > the SDMB might end up paying for it. I am not a lawyer, but the portion of the registration agreement quoted by rowrbazzle has probably been written by the Chicago Reader lawyers so it seems probable to me that they would not be financially responsible. Achernar, ftg - what is your proposal for ensuring the accuracy of posts in GQ? ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2002, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/8 "2002-11-15T10:44:51Z")
I think the disclaimer language as written is likely sufficient from a legal standpoint. However, no disclaimer, no matter how well-written or legally sound, prevents some fucking idiot who can find a lawyer sleazy enough from dragging the Reader into court regardless of who is at fault or what is agreed to. No one is safe from being sued under our civil justice system, so there’s almost no point worrying about it past the normal general disclaimer of liability. In short - I think the Reader has done what they can. I also found ironic the fact that the complaintant here himself seemed to have made a mistake equating wattage with voltage in the linked thread. ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2002, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/9 "2002-11-15T18:19:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Arnold Winkelried \* > Achernar, ftg - what is your proposal for ensuring the accuracy of posts in GQ? I don’t have a complete proposal, and, as you probably suspected, I don’t think it can really be done. But I do think at least bringing it to people’s attention, like **ftg** is doing, helps, unlike refining disclaimers. I personally don’t know enough about electronics to get involved in these threads, but if I did, I would be more on the lookout for bad advice now, and make some sort of point about it, as **ftg** did in the thread in question. I hope that people who read _this_ thread who _do_ post to threads like that will follow **ftg** ’s example. It _might_ also be helpful to point out in the registration agreement that electrical advice, like medical advice, has the potential to be dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2002, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/10 "2002-11-15T18:34:45Z")
Well, so can mechanical advice, cooking advice, advice on having sex, etc… I find it difficult think of any kind of advice that _doesn’t_ have the potential of being dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![Some\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Some\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Guy)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/11 "2002-11-16T02:07:41Z")
“Don’t touch nuthin’” 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/12 "2002-11-16T03:24:15Z")
Is that “advice on having sex”? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/13 "2002-11-16T03:38:17Z")
Some Guy: Good one! 😃 Maybe we should put this in the registration agreement: “If you believe something you read at the SDMB, you could die!” ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/14 "2002-11-16T04:08:57Z")
“The Chicago Reader, its heirs, assigns, and secret shadow organization controlling Major League Baseball, shall be indemnified and held harmless for actions resulting from someone else’s fucking stupidity. Look somewhere else, you litigious fucktard.” You know, I think that should be a more generally used disclaimer. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/15 "2002-11-16T13:20:18Z")
Arnold, that’d be “may or may not die” - have to keep it nice and vague, you know. I guess I’ve always assumed there to be a sort of a “caveat emptor” system here; that is, here’s some advice, take it at face value (or not); what you do with it is your own business. The SDMB has never presented itself as the only place in the world to get information, which is why people so often ask for cites to back up claims. If Poster A takes the advice of Poster B and saws off his own hand, then Poster A’s a monumental dummy for not corroborating Poster B’s advice with anyone else (say, WebMd). ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/16 "2002-11-16T13:35:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dantheman \* > I guess I’ve always assumed there to be a sort of a “caveat emptor” system here; that is, here’s some advice, take it at face value (or not); what you do with it is your own business. Well that’s good. I think we should drill that assumption into the heads of _all_ the posters. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/17 "2002-11-16T13:59:29Z")
You mean trepanation? Good plan! I do believe the cecil had a column on it … ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/18 "2002-11-16T14:47:43Z")
I think we should start treating electrical advice threads with the same delicacy we treat medical advice threads with. Believe it or not, there are dedicated posters who will, despite a perfectly legally binding disclaimer in effect, bring up the fact in medical threads that taking this advice can be dangerous. Do they do this to idemnify SDMB, or despite knowing it’s useless? Of course not. They do it to keep people from blindly following advice. Why can’t we do something similar for electrical advice threads? Do people think the danger is less severe? ---
**Author:** ![dantheman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dantheman/32/9421_2.png) [@dantheman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dantheman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/19 "2002-11-16T16:43:07Z")
I think it’s because there just aren’t as many electrical-advice threads as there are threads of a medical or legal nature. Even so, I don’t think anyone should take what’s written on this board - even if by experts - as absolute gospel in and of itself. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2002, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587/20 "2002-11-16T17:51:29Z")
Wow. Not much in this thread and now, at last, a serious discussion. My take has been that certain Bad Postings draw the attention of Mods rather quickly and are “taken care of” right away. E.g, discussions on illegal drug use, swapping Mp3s, direct links to naughty pics, etc. I have been surprised that some truly dangerous stuff has not been similarly policed. I’ve been messing around electronics since a kid in the '50s and know a lot about “things that sorta seem harmless but are really quite dangerous”. All I want is that the same sort of Moderation fervor that applies to other topics should be applied to issues such as this as well. That the registration agreement is supposed to cover it doesn’t seem to be enough. A ordinary user saying “Hey, stop recommending cutting off the ground connector off a plug” (as was suggested recently in another thread) doesn’t have the same effect as a Mod making a threatening post. Such Mod posts, in addition to chastising the poster, help set the tone for what is acceptable on the board. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bad-electrical-advice-part-ii/136587.md?page=2)