« first day (1156 days earlier)   

2:27 AM
0
Q: Are multiple versions of the same question constructive?

David StrattonClosely related: How close can two questions be without being duplicates? Can simply adding “ACCORDING TO X” salvage any question? This is something I worried about way back when we started requiring questions to be scoped to a denomination. Don't get me wrong, i agree with the fact that qu...

 
 
3 hours later…
5:56 AM
@Caleb It happened again on this post just a few minutes ago. See a snapshot.
@TRiG I forgot about the comics. I also didn't realize there were so many books. Now that I think about it, I think trek conventions are far more common than sw conventions. Good find.
 
@fredsbend his first two posts were downvoted and closed questions that just got deleted by the garbage collection robot leaving that q as his "first" undeleted post. I guess that's a bug although I do wonder if it isn't actually useful that way.
 
6:42 AM
@Caleb But why would that trigger a push to the review queue? They seem unrelated. That post is two weeks old. His first post should be pushed to the review queue when it is fresh and new, as usually does happen for other users.
 
6:57 AM
This currently has +7/-1
6
Q: Proposal for tagging questions that concern marriage, both traditional and non-traditional forms

fredsbendWe've had a recent headbutting concerning the [tag:marriage] tag. It started when a new user simply thought the tag ought to be inclusive of all the forms of marriage that various groups within Christianity accept. In hindsight, it wasn't the right course to jump in and make that first edit (yes,...

I can live with the minus one, but I was not willing to make those edits with anything less than +8. If there's any one here agreeing with the proposal, please upvote so I can make the changes in good conscious.
 
 
2 hours later…
8:33 AM
@FMS you around?
 
 
3 hours later…
11:23 AM
@fredsbend FMS has started using a gay-marriage tag, but I'd agree same-sex-marriage is better.
 
 
2 hours later…
1:32 PM
@curiousdannii Can we please kill ?
Overall, I agree with @Flimzy on this issue (no surprise there, I imagine). I just wanted to point out that bi people do actually exist, and may be in same-sex relationships. That's yet another reason not to use [homosexual-marriage] as a tag. Of course, genderqueer people also exist, and with them the entire concept of same-sex/opposite-sex can get a bit fuzzy. — TRiG Oct 15 at 16:53
 
2:18 PM
@TRiG out of curiosity, what do you think of same-sex-marriage as a tag? gay-marriage is no good, but I do think it is good to have a separate tag because they are distinct issues with distinct sets of questions. From a categorization point, it does make sense to separate the questions. One addresses what does Christianity say about homosexual marriage specifically, the other asks what applies to any marriage (heterosexual or homosexual)
 
2:37 PM
@AJHenderson Dunno. If there's enough questions about it to be worth splitting out from , then is probably the best wording.
The current marriage tag wiki needs rewriting, as it appears to be deliberately demeaning. (It was written by @PeterTurner, so no surprise there!)
 
2:51 PM
25
A: Is there an effective way to design a realistic religion for a world?

CAgrippaThere are a number of preconceptions that need to be cleared away in order to get at a useful answer. Religion is not reducible to faith, belief, ethics, or philosophy. Religion does not necessarily have anything to do with "gods" in whatever sense. "Miracle" is an extremely narrow and specific...

 
3:27 PM
@TRiG That's a pretty good answer. On a related note, I remember that I did read some of Émile Durkheim's work in my Philosophy of Religion class.
 
@El'endiaStarman I probably should too. (Now where was I reading about Durkheim recently?)
 

« first day (1156 days earlier)