« first day (5 days earlier)      last day (4632 days later) » 

5:19 PM
quick sound board. What would you do with this question?
> If you're spreading the gospel is it Ok to wreck the economy?
 
MAN this guy Jürgen A. Erhard is out to argue with everything that I have to say
I'm getting hounded by his comments on all of my posts debating with my answers
 
@waxeagle Um.... burn it with fire? I guess I'd have to see the question body but that sounds like it would come from somebody who pre-loaded the question with a bunch of assumptions that would have to be dealt with first and it would end up being a debate/discussion thread.
@waxeagle It's very difficult to define what "wreck the economy" would look like.
 
@Caleb I'm trying to figure out how to ask a question around that concept well enough that its a valid Q.
Basically the way the Church did (and a lot of times still does) missions is detrimental to the local economies they are ministering to.
 
@JonathonByrd Don't sweat it too much. It's not just you, he's been after some other folks too. If there is anything offensive, flag it. If there are any points worth responding to do so graciously with clear reasoning, then let it go.
 
@JonathonByrd echoing what Caleb says, if criticism is reasonable respond, else don't fee troll
 
5:27 PM
@waxeagle Agreed, and so my answer to the question would be "no", but the examples would have to be clear enough so as not to spark "what about" issues where other cases muddy the waters.
 
@Caleb right. And there is an argument to be made that if one person came to Christ through the destruction of a local economy it was totally worth it (a severely flawed argument IMO). A valid question on this topic has to be incredibly carefully constructed, and I'm not sure there is a way to do it in this format
 
@JonathonByrd I have a feeling we'll have a lot more like Jurgen soon.
 
@a_hardin I have heard rumors that the Reddit sharks are circling...but only rumors as reddit is blocked here...
 
@waxeagle Where are you?
@a_hardin Yes I've been thinking the same thing.
 
@Caleb work :)
 
5:34 PM
@waxeagle Just wait until we Skeptics notice the site ;-) (don't worry, we're not here to cause trouble, though at least I think some of the science on the site needs some correcting)
 
I'm sure they'll be here. I plan on posting to r/Christianity since it's already a well modded subreddit.
well maintained i should say
 
@Fabian we welcome you with open arms and (likely) closed minds :)
I'm certainly receptive to community experts (or just skeptics) chiming in on science topics as I feel like its at the very least the establishment perspective and should be presented here.
 
I think the skeptics will help build a lot of stronger Christians. As long as we can starve the trolls.
2
 
@a_hardin it will be important to distinguish between the skeptics and the trolls, thats for sure
 
Yeah, usually they'll be obvious. Jurgen seems to ride the line, but I haven't seen him be rude or anything that says he shouldn't be allowed.
 
5:39 PM
I don't intend to intrude on the faith topics, that would likely just cause trouble, but you have some bad science on the site, and that will likely not stay without opposition.
 
@Fabian thats fair. I have found the science questions to be underwhelming, but Biology/geology isn't really my thing.
 
"bad science"?
 
@Purmou "the only evidence for an old earth is carbon dating", there is a lot wrong with that sentence.
 
of course there is
lol
 
@Purmou Or pseudo science. It's common among Christian circles.
 
5:42 PM
i don't know how I'm a christian, but i'm an avid science fanatic
i'm pretty mixed up when it comes to certain things :P
 
Yeah, "My pastor said dinosaurs and humans lived together" is not good science. :)
@Purmou I'm glad I'm not alone on that.
 
anyways, i'll see you all later
 
later
 
0
Q: Scripture popup plugin

Nathan WheelerI think it would be great on this site if we could get Scripture popups from a provider such as that offered by Blue Letter Bible, which allows you to type references like "John 3:16 (KJV)" or "John 1:1-5 (YLT)" and gives you a hover event for them that displays the verses in a popup div. That w...

 
@NathanWheeler vtc'd as a dupe.
should be an answer on the Biblegateway question
 
5:50 PM
thanks.... I looked for something like that and couldn't find it
guess I wasn't using the right keywords :P
 
@NathanWheeler lol I just remembered it mentioned biblegateway, we should try to make sure that stays front page
@Dori is there any talk on the SE side of adding an easy scripture ref support for this site?
 
6:49 PM
I decided the community is better off without it
 
2
Q: Heinlein's Libertarianism vs John Paul II's Personalism

Peter TurnerLibertarianism as I understand it (from reading lots and lots of Robert Heinlein Sci Fi) is the idea that laws should be crafted so that personal liberties are always acknowledged. So long as you don't hurt anyone else, whatever you do is OK. Drugs, Sex etc... are legally OK, but it's not advoc...

Is this really constructive?
 
@waxeagle I feel like it kinda is.
 
@ElendiaStarman I feel like its fundamentally asking for a comparison of 2 paradigms that may intersect but probably don't
maybe I misunderstand the question though
 
oooh... and this is were I have to learn how to control my tongue :) (says calmly)
4
A: Is God of Anger or of Love?

Jonathon ByrdI LOVE THIS TOPIC!! God is a God of Love. God is also a God of Hate. If you love you must also hate. If you love children then you will hate abortion. God is angry with those enemies of his that practice sin. Hebrews 10:26-27 New International Version (NIV) 26 If we deliberately keep on sinnin...

I just want to laugh about Jurgens comment here
hehe
my question is... who's the God that He knows? cuz it doesn't sound like the God of the Bible.
 
@JonathonByrd backing you up on that one. I disagree with you on some key points, but not that one :)
 
7:01 PM
That's two downvotes from Jurgens, I don't think he likes my theology.
lol
@waxeagle There'
@waxeagle There's a difference between our disagreements tho. Ours are there so that Iron may sharpen Iron. (Calmly stated with no hate towards Jurgens, he's probably a good guy) but I don't think he wants to be sharpened
I think that's the making of a good tagline :) Iron sharpening Iron
 
@JonathonByrd right our disagreements are less vendetta and more discussion. Honestly around here if I see something I disagree with I just ignore it, its not worth down voting unless its egregious (although I can see how some folks could see your answer as egregious). We both obviously believe those people to be misinformed, but that's their beliefs
 
0
Q: What exactly do we know about Heaven?

dancekMost of us probably have a lot of vague ideas about Heaven. But when I really start to think about it, I can't back most of my ideas with the Bible. What do we actually know about Heaven?

 
@dancek I like it
Its a challenge because I want to answer, but would end up doing so off the top of my head and don't really have time to ref it all out
 
@dancek I'd upvote it, but I've already reached my max. :P
 
plus I feel like the descriptions of Heaven meld in my head (or maybe even in scripture) with the descriptions of the New Earth
 
7:06 PM
@ElendiaStarman you're more than welcome to vote tomorrow :)
 
@dancek I'm in the same vote, will try to uv tomorrow
 
@dancek I'll certainly do that. :P
 
Too much good stuff to upvote it all...
another good reason not to downvote right now
 
@waxeagle Well, I think that's pretty much how it is, actually...
 
mm... +10 tomorrow then :P
 
7:08 PM
@ElendiaStarman Yeah, I'm not sure how much of a difference there will actually be. I feel like travel between the two should be fairly seamless
 
@dancek that just spawned a new question from me :)
0
Q: Will we live on (an) earth after death?

Jonathon ByrdA Jehovah Witness and I spoke the other day and he showed explained to me that JW's believe that we'll live on earth after we die. Is there any scripture to back this up?

 
@dancek That's the spirit! :P
@JonathonByrd Arg! Another question I want to upvote! :P
 
@JonathonByrd Good question. The answer is yes after the earth is destroyed and reformed :). However I don't have the time to answer it fully. Maybe it will still be around for me later
 
@waxeagle If I recall correctly, Heaven after Jesus comes back basically IS the New Earth.
 
AH! @Caleb nice Q!
1
Q: Is "hate the sin, love the sinner" a Christian idea?

CalebThe expression "hate the sin, love the sinner" gets thrown about in both Christian and non-Christian circles, but it does not seem to a bible verse? Is it a biblical concept? Some say "that's the way that Jesus lived". Are there examples of Jesus conduct that demonstrate this one way or another?

 
7:10 PM
@ElendiaStarman thats basically my understanding. God burns the earth to the ground with cleansing fire, And heaven descends to eart...
@JonathonByrd ooh good one. I think so, God hates people, but we don't know who the elect are so its not ours to hate :)
 
@waxeagle Ever read "Heaven" by Randy Alcorn?
 
@JonathonByrd Did I just read that he specifically states he doesn't care what scripture says? That would lend interesting light on his meta question
 
@ElendiaStarman nope
 
@waxeagle I like to ask my questions as if I didn't already know what the answer was :) haha I know we will.
 
good night folks :)
 
7:11 PM
@waxeagle Nicely put
@dancek nite!
 
@JonathonByrd its a good way to ask (see 4/5 of my questions so far. the 5th one was because I can't explain it concicely)
 
"night"? It's afternoon here! :P

G'night! :)
 
@dancek g'night
 
@Caleb That would be a true interpretation of our new friend. I'm sure we'll get lots of these kinds of Christians when this goes public
 
I wonder how many downvotes I'm going to get for the first line
0
A: Is "hate the sin, love the sinner" a Christian idea?

wax eagleI think this is a very Christian concept. God hates sin, and in fact he hates sinners. However, we do not know who God has elected to save and so we should treat everyone with the love and respect that he has given to us. Matt 22:37-40 (NIV) 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with ...

 
7:23 PM
@waxeagle I wouldn't be surprised if you got two, maybe three.
 
@ElendiaStarman I can see it. sort of like my "yes some people are created to go to hell" answer.
+8/-2 on that one
 
@waxeagle Mmhmm. [nods]
Well, I'm gonna head out. I gots lots-a work to do...
 
@waxeagle I upvoted it :)
@Caleb I like how you reference Jurgens quote. Very nice.
 
@JonathonByrd I hate to ask this question, and its a hard one, but is John 3:16 actually overused?
I noted it was down in one of the other answers....
 
@waxeagle A lot, I'm sure. If another answer that doesn't expand on WHY we believe that to be the case I might ask you to, but for now I think it's fine.
 
7:31 PM
@Caleb I'm already planning how I'm going to do that :)
 
@waxeagle Yes. Over-used and under-under-stood.
 
@Caleb would it be mean to state the scope of "world" is potentially limited?
 
@waxeagle In my opinion it shows us that God display's His love to his enemies, like He commands us to do. But in reality, it doesn't mean that God has any blessings towards His enemies.
@waxeagle In fact we see that the opposite is true. It might make a good question to dig into the dynamics of God loving the things that He hates.
 
@waxeagle I'm inclined to think that this question is not the place to open that can of worms.
 
God does bless his enemies, at least in a general sense... Matt. 5:45
 
7:34 PM
@Caleb me neither
 
I'm sad to see my new Badge suggestions were met with such adversity...
as opposed to good humor :P
 
@Flimzy sorry :)
 
Hehe, everybody from last night is on again.
 
@waxeagle: I'm actually surprised the question only got 4 down votes, as opposed to being closed already :)
 
@Flimzy lol. It should be closed, but probably won't be unless we add some votes. I don't see the need to close it.
 
7:37 PM
@Purmou Just in time for me to start thinking about bed.
 
@Caleb lol. what time is it for you?
 
It feels odd to say "good night" and not "good morning" in the same chat in that order.
@Purmou 22:37
 
@Flimzy I should really look up verses before I comment...
 
@waxeagle: haha...
 
@Caleb Do you live in Europe then?
 
7:40 PM
@Purmou his profile says turkey :)
 
aha
hmm
oh, yeah
wow
i'm in pacific time
and he's in GMT +2
 
@waxeagle @Purmou My profile is indeed really-me. And since since I'm not in the one sliver of Turkey that is in Europe, I'm technically in Asia.
 
@Caleb that's interesting, because I'm Armenian
surely you've heard the history between the two nations?
 
@Caleb good deal. Its nice when people are honest in their profiles :)
 
@Purmou Aaaa ... one of the few who might actually know why Arminian and Armenian are not the same thing then!
 
7:43 PM
@Caleb Yes! In fact, someone edited my question...changed "Armenian" to "Arminian"
 
@Purmou "History" is a generous way to put that. And I'll leave that at that for now.
 
@Caleb Lol I keep spelling Arminianism Armenianism :)
 
It was @dancek, actually
I'm honest in my SE profiles
Elsewhere though, I like to keep a little privacy
Generally, on SE sites, the community is mature enough to handle even the younger users well
 
@Purmou Really? What post? That might have been on my advice not knowing context.
 
7:49 PM
Ya just found it. And that yes @dancek sounds right. That's hilarious ... and sorry about the mixup. My fault for not checking context. You might want to actually put a footnote on that that you mean the people group not theological faction.
@waxeagle @JonathonByrd Right on clue. So should I throw out a question specifically about how john 3:16 can be read different ways or should we wait for Hermanutics?
 
@Caleb edited.
 
@Flimzy That's in the sense that he shows compassion/respect for his enemies. Not necessarily a blessing
 
@Caleb you know I kind of want to see how folks response to it. You might get downvoted
@JonathonByrd Common Grace!
 
@waxeagle Kindness is also another word for it. I'm remember scripture that says it was Gods kindness that lead us to repentance
 
@waxeagle Yes I realize that. But let me give it a shot.
<typing><deleting><typeing>
 
7:54 PM
@Caleb its a tough one to ask well, without seeming like you have an agenda :)
 
: This tag is for questions related to sin, which is loosely defined as something that of which God disapproves.
 
@JonathonByrd: That sounds like a stretch to me... possibly drawing an artificial distinction between "blessing" and "compassion/respect." I know many Christians who consider those things to be blessings when they receive them.
 
@waxeagle can I edit your answer to God hates sinners and bold that part of it?
 
why do so many tags have the "This tag is for..." preceding the actual tag definition?
 
@JonathonByrd sure if you want to
 
7:57 PM
@waxeagle sry, I just like bold, it helps when catching points in large answers.
 
@JonathonByrd its fine. Always feel free to edit my posts for clarity or emphasis.
@JonathonByrd I went ahead and bolded the contrast I am trying to make as well
 
@Purmou: I would encourage you to improve the tag description... that particular one also has some notably bad (or at least odd) grammar in it.
 
@Flimzy Yeah, I'm working on it right now
 
@waxeagle Awh! Perfect.
I think the number one problem with Christians, is that they only remember what they want to remember. Whatever concretes their presumptions prior to reading.
So many of them read over the other stuff and IT DOESN'T EVEN PHASE THEM
 
@JonathonByrd Too true.
For a lot of us we have heard this stuff from birth and its so drilled into us that we just site there numb to all of it.
 
8:01 PM
@Purmou They shouldn't.
 
Like say how easy it is to forget how awesome Romans is...
(I've noticed this the last few days)
 
@JonathonByrd: I think the number one problem with Christians is sin... :P
 
@JonathonByrd Ya we know you do. We're going to have a talk about that on meta when I get around to it :)
 
"Actions whose intents are against God's will."

This is just the excerpt, I think I'll expand on it a bit in the full tag wiki. What do you think?
 
@Flimzy haha
 
8:02 PM
@Purmou go for it
 
@Caleb ha! you don't like my use of bold? :)
 
Can/should we use tag links in full tag wikis?
 
@Purmou yes please
 
@JonathonByrd I love good use of bold to highlight key bits of texts. Your use of H<bigger-than-it's-parent-context> tags in answers drives me crazy.
 
@Caleb Haha, I will attempt to refrain from so many headers :)
 
8:06 PM
Nothing personal you understand, just a personal issue. And I will eventually suggest some formatting guidelines on meta and we can talk through them there.
 
@Caleb I actually think I've only used those on really big answers for topics that I'm on fire about.
 
Er, that didn't come out right. Nothing personal against you, just an issue with my personal preferences :)
 
"To sin is to commit an action which is frowned upon by God. Several examples of sins are set forth by the bible, such as those illustrated in the ten commandments ()."
 
@JonathonByrd In that case you're a pretty fiery guy!
 
Purmou: It's a big improvement... although I don't like the phrase "frowned upon"... sounds too informal. (and might be hard for some non-native speakers to understand)
 
8:09 PM
@Flimzy "condemned" is much better :)
 
@Caleb probably.. I was raised with the belief that you say a prayer and you're saved. Then God visited me one night and my life has been on fire ever since. After a few days of solid tears of course...
 
@Purmou I don't think tag wiki's are going to be able to hold theological definitions like that. The summaries just need to point people in the right direction as far as how the tag fits into use of the site.
 
Actually, it's possible to sin against another person, too
The dictionary, oddly enough, seems to have a good general definition.
 
@Flimzy What do you think would fit better?

@Caleb Maybe I misunderstood the purpose of the full tag wikis. I thought they were just to expand a bit more on the stuff in the excerpt?
 
I'd use a paraphrase of that
 
8:10 PM
@Purmou they are. But they are a place for information not theology :)
even though the difference is rather small sometimes
 
@waxeagle I see, so you'd prefer them to be a bit more neutral then?
 
0
Q: What about John 3:16?

CalebI have never heard of any verse more quoted and memorized than this one. Many people know it without knowing a single other thing about Christianity.* If there was one verse we don't need to quote in a post this would be it, but here it is for reference anyway: John 3:16 (ESV) For God so l...

 
@Purmou Neutrality is going to be very important on site-wide things like tags.
 
If you guys have any quick edit suggestions before it get's blown apart and answers go 100 different ways let me know.
 
@Caleb interesting question. I first was intrigued by that verse after reading I am America (And so can you)
 
8:12 PM
@Caleb Title should be "What does John 3:16 actually mean?"
 
@Caleb I thought it was whosoever
 
current title is too vague
@JonathonByrd ESV<>NIV
 
anyone see the Gospel of John movie?
 
@Caleb Boy I'd love to spend an hour answering that question with H tags...
 
with Henry Ian Cusick?
 
8:14 PM
@waxeagle Good point. I avoided the word "actually" however just to not stir the hornets nest up too early.
 
Don't you guys feel that "What does _____ mean?" questions are a bit too opinionated? I mean everybody could have a different interpretation.
 
@Purmou The only way we can combat that is by using scripture
 
@Purmou yes they really are...specificity would be key here.
@Caleb what about asking if the verse means the whole world?
 
@waxeagle Actually that would be KJV vs NIV/ESV, but same difference. I adapted the question.
 
@Caleb edit noted
 
8:17 PM
@waxeagle I figure that point will come out in answers.
 
@Caleb k. Just wondering if @Purmou is right and its too broad/opinion centered...
 
Possibly.
Let me think about a way to word that, hang on.
 
I think the question is important. I'm not at all sure how I'd answer it as written (if I felt I had a useful answer to offer)
 
@Flimzy Right, and the question is important or not, is it currently, or can it be phrased in a way that actually fits here
 
Very literally, it's saying that God loved the world so much that he gave Jesus, and whoever follows His word will have eternal life.
 
8:22 PM
I mean, I think you're really asking "Does this have a deeper/different meaning than is commonly asumed."
 
@Purmou right. But I dispute that world means the entire world.
 
of course it doesn't
at the time the Americas didn't "exist"
if that's what you mean. but again, i'm thinking literally here. i should be looking at this more from a theological standpoint.
 
But to really dissect the verse, we have to define "the world," "believe," and "eternal life". And I suspect asking for specific interpretation of each of those is a separate question.
or 3 separate questions I mean
 
@Flimzy Yes. My current version actually has similar phrasing, reposting in just a sec.
 
@Flimzy Yeah, I agree. But even then, I feel we're open to too many interpretations. The site's going into Public Beta tomorrow.
 
8:24 PM
@Purmou Yup! Can't wait! :P
 
Nice answer, @waxeagle
0
A: Who wrote the book of Genesis?

wax eagleTradition says Moses compiled the book of Genesis, along with writing the rest of the Torah. However from Wikipedia: Tradition credits Moses as the author of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, but the books are in fact anonymous and look back on Moses as a figure from the d...

 
Alright how about now?
 
@Purmou Tried to present both sides with an edit. I think its fair to just say we don't know. I think AiG can be a bit dogmatic at times. I don't think anyone will lose faith over Moses no having written the Torah
 
@waxeagle Agreed :)
 
@Caleb: Did you mean to call into question the concept of love? Or the world? Or maybe both/
 
8:28 PM
Public Beta in 22 Hours. Right On!
 
@waxeagle you can never please everybody. it's a very good answer though, based on the multiple viewpoints
 
@JonathonByrd Far out maaan! :P
 
@Flimzy Mostly "world" but is only relevant in terms of what it is that God loved, so in a sense both. This controversy only comes up in the context of the scope of God's loving vs hating.
 
Can you fulfill a commitment even in the public beta, or is 10 questions or answers in the private beta?
 
@Purmou the exact reqs are top secret
 
8:30 PM
@Purmou I think commitments are for the duration of beta, not the private bit.
 
heh
@waxeagle as in, you don't even know it? :P

@caleb I see
 
@Purmou The note we have about that is something like "commitments can be deemed fulfilled as soon as the second day of public beta"
 
@Purmou no as in and Se employee said it was one of their top sekret things
 
@Caleb Ah, that's interesting

@waxeagle i see now. :P

@ahardin welcome!
 
hello
does it bother anyone else that the [jesus] tag has 0 followers?
 
8:33 PM
@a_hardin that's kind of hilarious
 
@a_hardin [laughs] @waxeagle I agree! :P
 
okay, there's at least 1 now
 
@a_hardin You should screen shot that for posterity.
@a_hardin Before ... it's too late.
 
It sounds better (or worse?) if you say "Does it bother anyone else that has 0 followers?"
 
@Flimzy Brilliant.
 
8:35 PM
yeah, but how do you do that?
 
@a_hardin The tag part?
 
show the tag in chat like that
 
It's [ tag:tag-name ] without the spaces.
 
Well, there's 1 follower of now
 
@a_hardin Very nice.
 
8:36 PM
Like so: .
 
@ahardin: say [ tag:jesus ] (without the spaces)
 
[tag:Jesus is it]
 
@Caleb Are we all waiting until 5pm before we answer this one?
or is it just me?>
 
8:37 PM
@a_hardin Correction:
 
ahh
 
@JonathonByrd Why do you say 5 pm?
 
I bet Jesus would be good at tag. And every time you tagged him you'd be healed!
 
@ElendiaStarman Oh, that's when my rations get reset for the new day :) 5pm pst
 
@waxeagle 20+ minutes without a down vote. I call that a success :)
@JonathonByrd Yes absolutely. I say it's fine to wait and see how the wind blows before chiming in.
 
8:38 PM
@Caleb That's because Jurgens probably got mad and left...
 
@JonathonByrd lol
 
@Caleb I'm a bit stunned. We will see what answers its brings. If it doesn't have a good one by tonight I may chime in
 
@JonathonByrd I see. I'm in the EST zone, so it'd be 8 pm for me. :P
 
You guys were talking last time about everybodies age. Are we all (those in this chat) in our Twenties?
 
@JonathonByrd @Purmou is 14 :)
 
8:41 PM
@JonathonByrd I'm actually not quite in the twenties yet... :P
 
barely old enough we don't have to report him to the authorities (by ~2yrs)
 
ah yes, the internet child safety laws right?
how often do SE staff deal with that kind of stuff? not often I presume.
 
@Purmou yup. gotta be 13.
 
i'll be done with my 30s in november
 
@Purmou not often, but it comes up
 
8:42 PM
with my 20s i mean
 
@JonathonByrd I've I'm the oldest one in this room then that's a scary thought.
 
Are we discussing a/s/l?
 
I'm 28, 29 this saturday.
 
... on a Christian chat room?
 
@Flimzy in not so many letters it wouls seem so :)
 
8:43 PM
@Flimzy Apparently I'm too old for that ligo. English please?
 
I'll be 32 in 2 weeks...
 
@Caleb age sex location
 
Caleb: Age/sex/location
 
@Flimzy Well, looks like it... :P
 
its an old AIM/IRC convention
 
8:43 PM
@Flimzy And Flimzy takes the cake
@waxeagle haha
 
@waxeagle Huh. Well my location was covered earlier today, my sex is pretty self apparent, and now we're on age so I guess that's a yes.
 
Caleb: A common phrase on teeny-bopper chat rooms... especially dating/sex solicitation ones.
I laughed when I got spam recently asking me for my a/s/l
claiming to be from a woman who "saw my profile" and wanted to meet me
 
ooh 3 more answer upvotes to mortarboard :)
ok. time to go home. See you guys later...
 
@waxeagle Seeya
 
@waxeagle: Seeya!
@Flimzy At least it wasn't from a man... :P
 
8:51 PM
Eh?
Oh, the spam...right
heh
 
answered caleb's john 3:16 question as best as i could
even though i'm not too fond of questions like that, when it in fact can be three different questions like you said, @Flimzy
but I still think we need some good questions and answers on the beta, even if it gets closed later on.
 
@Purmou: I'd +1 but you'll have to wait a few hours for that +10. :P
 
@ElendiaStarman Why?
 
@Purmou Because I've been out of votes for a few hours already. :P
 
@ElendiaStarman XD
 
9:12 PM
ugh
Richard defeats me again.
 
Hello room
 
@Sotiris Hello there Sotiris!
@Purmou Lol. It's to be expected that the experts will frequently post awesome answers... :P
Lol, @Caleb, you beat me to editing "martyrized". :P
Hmmm...wouldn't it be awesome if [tag:] posted recursive tags? :P
@Caleb
 
That would be one of my concerns with being a moderator actually. Fiddling with people's stuff is one thing as a peer and taken as a user helping out, but as a mod I'm afraid it might be seen as overbearing.
 
@Caleb In a beta, I think it's better to have nitpicky people
nitpicky mods, that is
 
9:28 PM
@Caleb We have a pretty awesome community atm. I think our main people would make a great board of trustees :)
 
it's better to establish the "proper" way of doing things in the beta
afterwards, if/when it gets launched (I'm pretty confident though), they'll pick those less hungry for edits. :P
so i had inspiration for a question about Dante's Inferno
but then i realized it may be a bit too far off
 
question with format "what is the biblical basis for X" is valid?
 
depends
any specific one you're asking about?
 
@Sotiris The general precedent so far on that has been "yes".
 
@Sotiris: Adding to Caleb's reply, a couple of my questions are in that format.
 
9:33 PM
ok thanks :)
@Caleb thanks for the grammar corrections in my posts :)
 
@Caleb Why did you change "The twelve disciples after Pentecost" to just "The twelve disciples"?
 
@Purmou I didn't. That must have been somebody else.
 
@caleb Hmm, okay.
 
@Sotiris No problem.
 
@NathanWheeler Welcome!
 
9:41 PM
(back) :P
and Thanks!
 
@Kramii Hi!
 
@NathanWheeler and @Kramii: Hello there! :)
 
Hi! Just checking out what is happening in chat.
 
@Purmou: I think I just clobbered your suggested edit while trying to fix the title. Also it looks like you were editing an old version of the post because it had you deleting a bunch of stuff. Sorry about not getting the verse reference merged tho, can you add that bit back?
 
@Caleb Yeah I was doing that just now
 
9:45 PM
We need to be careful not to change the content of people's questions when we edit them...
adding a reference is good...
I like to follow the rule never to make stylistic changes, except to correct bad grammar or spelling, or remove extraneous phrases like "Thanks in advance!" and in this example "So my first question is:" (followed by 2 questions)
 
I removed "So my first question is:" because he had only one question in there
 
@Purmou That's pretty common.
 
@Caleb Also, this bit: "How and when they ended their lives?" I feel is a bit unnecessary, do you agree?
 
"So my first question is: Is there any historical evidence as to what happened to the twelve disciples? How and when they ended their lives?"
I see 2 question marks there :)
 
@Flimzy Um ... not sure I buy that. How about something more like: not change the meaning of people's questions without them approving?
 
9:49 PM
@Flimzy Well, originally, there was only "Is there any historical evidence as to what happened to the twelve disciples?"
 
@Purmou I think it's extraneous but it's a a scope of question problem we should probably take up with the OP.
 
@Caleb I'm not suggesting it as a hard and fast rule for everyone to follow... I'm just saying I follow that.
 
is the OP here?
nope
okay, i'll just save my edit, and you can modify it as you see fit
@Flimzy Also, found the second question within the question
"Are these legends true?"
 
@Purmou Doesn't count. "Is there evidence? Is it true?" is two question marks but one question. I don't think starting out with "my first question is" and then asking the same question twice qualifies as two questions.
Besides, if that phrase was legitimate, there should be two question posts, not one :)
@Purmou Huh. I don't see the suggestion. Maybe it's in a wait queue.
 
Regardless of the number of actual questions, "So my first question is" is a bit redundant on a Q&A site, where all questions are questions...
and +1 to @Caleb's suggestion that it should be 2 questions, if it really is 2 questions
 
9:56 PM
my computer just blew up or something, heh
@Caleb I didn't save it yet, my computer shut down
gotta love the draft saving system on SE
anyways, @Caleb saved it
...
why'd @PeterTurner rollback?
never mind
 

« first day (5 days earlier)      last day (4632 days later) »