The Upper Room

12:43 AM

2

A soul is the combination of the body and the spirit. And I, the Lord God, formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul; Genesis 2:8 IV The spirit was created before the body, possibly even before the creation. N...

Should it be noted in that answer that it is based on Mormon beliefs?

wax eagle

@a_hardin It probably should be. I'm not sure how to best do that.

the edit war there is interesting, its temping to lock it, but I think the users handled it ok.

a_hardin

Yeah, it looks like it will work itself out using votes

wax eagle

@a_hardin I think so..

Flimzy

You could at least clean up some of the obsolete comments

wax eagle

@Flimzy sure thing

scrubbed a number of them, specifically those heavily criticizing mormon beliefs.

Flimzy

12:54 AM

looks much more digestible now :)

wax eagle

@Flimzy k, I will leave it up to the comments to clarify that the beliefs there reflect Mormonism.

Flimzy

Seems reasonable, if the OP didn't want to do it himself.

wax eagle

@Flimzy will, if you are familiar with their beliefs, or some of their lingo its pretty obvious in the first sentence or first quote (more so now that the version is specified). The soul = body + spirit made it obvious. But I didn't know that til hanging out here.

hey

@Richard

Flimzy

Yeah... the book of 'Moses' makes it obvious to me, too...

But I'm sure many wouldn't recognize those tell-tale signs

Richard

Hey there. Just popping in. ;)

wax eagle

12:57 AM

@Flimzy agreed.

ooh Windows 8 preview :) I might have to check that out

Flimzy

eww

a_hardin

@waxeagle downloading now :)

wax eagle

@Flimzy my desktop doesn't have an OS right now...might give that a shot...

Flimzy

@waxeagle No OS => Windows is a downgrade

a_hardin

@Flimzy He actually didn't have it as 'Moses' before. He had it mislabeled as a Genesis verse

Flimzy

1:00 AM

@a_hardin: yeah, I saw that... is there some significance to that, or was it just a typo?

wax eagle

@Flimzy lol, well it has a windows 7 RC so its not exaclty "no" OS...just one that reboots every 2 hrs...

a_hardin

I think it may have been unintentional

Flimzy

Do Mormons use an alternate version of Genesis or something?

He was quoting several other verses from Genesis, so I would assume just a mistake

a_hardin

I have to give @WhatAboutJohn3_17 for catching the misquotes

Flimzy

it's quite the kind of mistake I would have made :)

@waxeagle: Linux is free, and probably a quicker download... ;)

a_hardin

1:01 AM

The other verses from Genesis are actually pretty different from other translations/original hebrew, too

wax eagle

@Flimzy lol, im currently browisng in a ubuntu clone...

Flimzy

ubuntu clone? What does that mean/

Here's a question I'd love to post... but I'm sure it's off topic... so maybe you guys can help... hehe... We're starting a new bilingual ministry at church... we'll meet on Saturday nights, and do praise and worship, and a time of personal testimonies. Then once a month, we'll do a social event,s uch as a BBQ, etc...

wax eagle

@Flimzy its a netbook specific flavor called easy peasy...

Flimzy

We're looking for a name... I kind of like the name "The Bridge" (or "La puente" in Spanish), but the church already has a ministry with this name for divorcees.

wax eagle

@Flimzy perfect chat question. bad site question :). But thats what chat is for :)

Flimzy

1:03 AM

So we need another name... it ought to relate to relational aspect of church... and shouldn't sound too "churchy", because we want it to be an outreach for the community

@waxeagle: Exactly :)

wax eagle

Rosa de Saron, Palabra viva are good ones.

a_hardin

@Flimzy Is there something related to "crossing" a bridge or something?

Flimzy

Someone suggested "The connection" or "connections"...

@a_hardin: dunno... are there any bible verses about that? If we could pull the name from the bible, that would win bonus points :)

I even had the idea of using a third language for the name... like 'Ubuntu' (which I think means community, or something similar)

But I dont' wnat to use that actual word... b/c they'll think we're a group of nerds :)

(and maybe we are... but we want to hide that fact!)

El'endia Starman

4:36 AM

@Flimzy "Aliit" is Mandalorian for "family". :P :D

dancek

9:38 AM

christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/2697/… nearing Populist

a_hardin

12:23 PM

now I see diamonds everywhere!

wax eagle

@a_hardin lol

Richard

12:40 PM

@a_hardin Yeah, it's kind of weird, actually.

@dancek One more vote... ;)

dancek

@Richard unless someone upvotes you! :P

Richard

@dancek I'd love to see anyone with a gold star at this point. My answer came later than his, so he has a bit of a head start over my answer. Also, mine might be a bit controversial because I question the very definition of rape. ;)

wax eagle

@Richard I think we gave Nick 2 valid options for directions that question can go to get reopened.

Richard

12:56 PM

@waxeagle Yeah, I can see another question on the topic. As it is, it's a duplicate.

afk.

wax eagle

@Richard indeed

Richard

1:44 PM

Man, I'm having to throw these chat rooms into a new window. I'm having too many tabs open for chat! ;)

Richard

2:03 PM

Is this duplicated anywhere?

0

Q: Are people by nature good or are they inherently evil?

Inspired by the question Is a moral society more open to the gospel than an immoral one?. Are people, by nature, good? Meaning, do people tend to and want to do good things and help out others? Or are people evil by nature? In other words, do people tend to be egoistical, to the point of be...

a_hardin

5

Q: Are we born sinners?

We can be quite certain that God didn't originally create us as sinners. Rather Adam and Eve chose sin in the Fall. The doctrine of original sin is widely held in Christian churches, but those opposing it are not a small minority, either. As original sin means that we inherit our sinfulness from...

sin biblical-basis original-sin

Is that close enough?

Richard

@a_hardin I think it's similar, but I'm more curious about the nature of people as we treat other people. It's more of a question about adults.

almost a humanism-vs-Christianity type question.

1

Q: Is a moral society more open to the gospel than an immoral one?

One of the answers to this question got me thinking. If we work to make the common morals of our society more in line with Biblical morality does that make the members of our society more open to the gospel? There's no doubt that an immoral society is more likely to be antagonistic or even host...

culture society

What do you all think of that question? It seems pretty speculative to me.

dancek

2:40 PM

@Richard to me, too... It might have a point, but it's really hard to answer with anything conclusive.

a_hardin

2:56 PM

@Richard Can this one be reopened?

0

Q: Can you be a Christian and serve in the Military?

Can you serve in a military service and not violate the will of god?

killing soldier

Richard

@a_hardin Done. Thanks! :)

El'endia Starman

5:00 PM

A sure sign that activity has increased to a good level: I ran out of votes 7 hours before UTC. :P

a_hardin

nice! :)

DTest

@elendiastarman how is that a sign? I figure you upvote everything anyway to run out of so many votes :P

wax eagle

@DTest I think Elendia is talking about things slowing down enough

El'endia Starman

@DTest That day where we had 3 new questions total...I used like 15 votes.

@waxeagle Nono...I mean things slowed down too much. Now it's back to a good level. :P

a_hardin

I've noticed new users asking pretty good questions

DTest

5:04 PM

@a_hardin agree

@richard your selfless question...when I read it it seems a bit speculative.

Richard

@DTest Hmm... Yeah, I agree. Now I have to decide whether to delete it or close it. ;)

I've deleted it. You're right. It doesn't belong here.

Maybe Philosophy.se (if they allow speculative questions).

DTest

5:29 PM

isn't all philosophy speculative?

wax eagle

@ahardin, @DTest and @dancek what do you guys think about the on-topicness of christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/2793/…

do you guys think it should stay open or get closed?

or constructiveness?

El'endia Starman

Or even have it be edited to provide a constructive focus.

Like missionary work to 3rd world countries or whatever.

Richard

@DTest If it's not, it would be merely history of philosophy, I suppose.

DTest

@waxeagle it's a tough call. It's speculative, but I like the question.

Richard

@waxeagle I'm trying hard not to make a joke about the Church of Beaver Cleaver in the comments.

@DTest I like the question too, but it seems to me to be Not Constructive: "We expect answers to generally involve facts, references, or specific expertise; this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion."

El'endia Starman

5:39 PM

I actually said much the same thing in the mod chat:
"People like it (including me)...but it's not quite a good fit..."

a_hardin

@Richard I'd have to agree with this

But if something like this is allowed, can "everyone thinks it's a good question" be a reason to keep it open?

19

Q: Is this rotating cube interface user-friendy?

I'm working on a prototype for an innovative form interface, where different parts of the form are shown on different sides of a cube. The cube rotates, and the user can fill it out as the cube spins. I have a working example. To me, it seems like a pretty robust solution (before, our forms took...

interaction-design

Richard

Even the 6 answers it has are mostly speculation and debates. Although a_hardin's answer comes as close as we can get to a definitive answer here.

DTest

@Richard yeah, just wondering if it can be salvaged. I do not think it's 'off-topic', though...just not-constructive in the current form

Richard

@DTest I think if it were salvaged, it would invalidate at least some of the answers to the question, unfortunately.

wax eagle

@Richard and thats ok, we can ask the users to update them and delete them if they don't. Or the OP can decide to write a new question, either way

El'endia Starman

5:46 PM

@Richard Furthermore, there haven't really been that many votes on the answers.

Richard

@ElendiaStarman True.

El'endia Starman

Well, if it's been agreed that the question is not constructive, why don't you guys go ahead and start submitting close votes on it? :)

Richard

@DTest If you VtC, it can always be re-opened later.

DTest

@richard truth

El'endia Starman

Hmm...I wonder what happens if you try to submit a close vote after a question has already been closed...

It'd be epic if we could get THREE mods to close the question at the same time...with three supervotes! :P

DTest

5:58 PM

I struggle with these questions because they ARE good. But I've always had problems with the idea of 'no poll/opinion' questions on SE. I'll go with the flow, but I disagree that ALL SE sites should have these type of questions as not-constructive.

wax eagle

@DTest have you read good subjective, bad subjective?

DTest

don't think so

Richard

@DTest I agree. However, I think this site is a great place for constructive, polling type of questions. Questions like "Is God a god of Anger or Love?" There are multiple opinions, beliefs and doctrines about this, but the answers can be backed biblically. This question, though...

@waxeagle Yeah, this is an excellent post.

wax eagle

7

Q: Extra votes to migrate lead to multiple posts

This (now deleted) SO question somehow ended up with 14 people voting to close and migrate it. For each extra vote, an extra copy of the question appeared to have been created on Meta (though they have now been cleaned up). Now a similar problem has occurred on this Meta question where close vot...

bug status-completed vote-to-close migration

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle LOL. So it can happen... :P

wax eagle

6:08 PM

@ElendiaStarman sort of...this was a bug, but its not the only time a question has had several closures :)

Stack Exchange

0

Q: What should we put into the FAQ?

We (the moderators) plan on adding the decisions and such of particular meta questions into the FAQ. However, we wanted some community input, so we are asking this: What do you want to see incorporated into the FAQ? Post each suggestion as a separate answer so the community can vote them up or...

discussion

a_hardin

@ElendiaStarman I once VtCed at the same time as another person, and it listed 6 people who had VtCed

in C.SE during the closed beta, i think

El'endia Starman

@a_hardin Gotcha. Probably doesn't have quite the force of impact as seeing three diamonds... :P

wax eagle

@a_hardin neat... scampers off to go find it :)

Flimzy

6:40 PM

what are better tags for my new questin?

0

Q: Should Christians uphold unjust laws that are not overtly immoral?

Inspired by this question, I'm left wondering how Christians ought to respond to laws that are unjust, but not overtly immoral? I think most of us will agree that Christians ought to disregard laws that mandate immorality, or that prohibit morality. The cliche examples of the first would be law...

law morality

law's description says it's about OT law... is there a better tag for modern laws?

Richard

Oops. misread.

dancek

7:15 PM

@waxeagle I already said to Richard that I think it's pretty speculative, and really hard to answer with anything conclusive. I think the question might have a point, but it's not very suited for Q&A

vtc'd

Flimzy

@Richard: I'm tempted to ask another question about slavery in the Bible

But I'm not quite sure how I'd word it yet

Richard

Wikipedia might help. That's where I got that 1 Peter verse.

Or maybe got-questions. You might be able to pull some of the verses from there. It is an interesting topic!

Flimzy

@Richard: I don't know if either of those resources address the issue of modern de-facto slavery... (I'll read to see)

@Richard: The concept that many people today live in effective slavery, even though they are "willfully employed"

@Richard: Many people are barely getting by on their income, and effectively don't have the choice to stop working, even though they aren't legally required to keep working.

Richard

@Flimzy Now we're touching on minimum wage, too...

Flimzy

This was especially true in U.S. history right after the abolition of slavery... many slaves were better off as actual slaves than as de-facto slaves after the abolition. And this phenomenon exists quite often in many other societies. And to some degree, still in U.S. socieety.

@Richard: I guess I'm idly wondering if the Bible didn't prohibit slavery because it recognizes that "slavery" isn't the actual problem...

If it had said "Thou shalt have no slaves." and left it at that, we'd all think (as most of us do today) that the real problem is slave ownership... not fair treatment of our slaves/employees.

But instead it tells us to treat our slaves justly...

Richard

7:28 PM

@Flimzy I think that's the key there. "Love your neighbors as yourself"

Flimzy

I think a strong argument could be made that it's better to be a slave of a good master than an employee of a bad boss.

So, I'm still not sure how to word a question about all this... but I'm sure there's at least one good question in there somewhere :)

I'll let it percolate for a few days. Maybe my recent question will provoke some answers that help.

Richard

@Flimzy I think there's probably several. The trick is to make sure it's not to vague ala this one

Flimzy

hehe

I think I need to think of a third example of an "unjust but not overtly immoral law"

that isn't based on race

to bring that question back on track

@Richard: BTW, I think 'service' would be a better tag than 'service-to-others'... as 'to-others' is kind of implied in 'service'

unless you mean self-service...

Richard

@Flimzy Eeks. that kind of gives me a bad image.

Flimzy

@Richard: I was thinking of fueling stations...

@Richard: And buffet lines...

DTest

7:42 PM

"4. In Michigan, it is legal to kill a dog for attacking chickens, livestock or people, but you can't snuff the pooch in a high altitude decompression chamber or by electrocution."

Richard

@Flimzy Good call. I've edited it

DTest

I love whacky laws

El'endia Starman

@DTest Every state has them... :P

Emphasis on "every".

DTest

@elendiaStarman yup!

Richard

@DTest I think that's fair. Although the electrocution clause should've been part of a larger "animal rights" bill.

DTest

7:43 PM

that was just the first useable one I came across

@richard haha

Flimzy

Maybe I need to change my question

"Can a law be unjust but still moral?"

DTest

define 'moral'

Flimzy

@DTest: That seems to be precisely the objection coming in on my current question... some are saying that unjust is, by definition, immoral.

@DTest: If that's true, then the entire premise of my existing question is flawed.

El'endia Starman

Hmm. I feel like if a law is moral, then it is just. However, the contrapositive (if a law is immoral, it is unjust) wouldn't necessarily be true.

DTest

@flimzy i almost think we need to have a question (meta?) on how this site defines the terms 'moral' (and others..just)

because i've seen that argument almost everywhere there's a question regarding morality

Flimzy

7:53 PM

@ElendiaStarman: But what about "If a law is just it is...." and "If a law is unjust it is...." ?

justice seems much easier to define than morality

although, I suppose I've never tried to define 'justice' outside of the law

so maybe it's hard to define, too :)

Within the law, all laws are just

by virtue of being law

So clearly, a higher standard must be called upon...

El'endia Starman

@Flimzy Ehhh...not quite. Consider all the times the US has had a law declared unconstitutional...

Flimzy

@ElendiaStarman: Yeah, that would be a higher standard....

@ElendiaStarman: Still, within the law itself, it is "just"... In the sense that the "justice system" enforces laws, and not any other higher standard.

@ElendiaStarman: Laws declared unconstitutional were done so by a higher standard, not by the law itself (or its own jurisdiction)

El'endia Starman

@Flimzy What about the 18th and 21st Amendments? One said drinking alcohol was illegal and the other repealed it.

Both within the Constitution.

Flimzy

@ElendiaStarman: Those were subject to a higher authority, as well--the authority of congress and the states.

@ElendiaStarman: Which are in turn held accountable to voters...

@ElendiaStarman: In the U.S. justice system, the voters have the highest authority.

technically speaking... in theory... I'm not interested in debating which Inc's hold the real power, etc :)

El'endia Starman

@Flimzy: [chuckle] I guess you need to define "higher power" or whatever so that you have a basis for saying all laws are just, according to the law itself.

Flimzy

7:59 PM

Anyway, my point is, for anyone to say a law is unjust, they must look to a higher power than the law itself. Because absent some higher power, every law is just, by virtue of being law.

I think most people consider a law "just" if it is fair to all parties involved.. and then clearly racial segregation laws fail.

But the same people probably think that it's okay that you can drive at the age of 16, but not 14... and that it's okay to disallow marriage between 9 year olds...

So simple "equality" isn't the standard, either.

El'endia Starman

Hmm.

Flimzy

Is it "just" to require a work permit of a visiting alien? And if so, then why is it not just to enslave certain people?

Is it "just" that combatant U.S. citizens get treated differently than non-U.S. citizens at trial? If so, why? If not, why not?

Anyway... the conclusion I think I'm bringing myself to is that it's going to be very difficult to ask such a question, considering the definitions of 'just' and 'moral' are so ambiguous :)

El'endia Starman

8:17 PM

@Flimzy Hey...ask a question about defining those! :P

Flimzy

I might... but "Define X" questions always take a lot of heat :)

At any rate, I'll give this current question a bit more time to percolate before I post any more follow-ups

Maybe the dissenters are a small minority, and won't detract too much anyway.

Richard

@Flimzy Yeah, I suspect that my morality question isn't going to go over so well.

Flimzy

I appended my question.. I hope that will ward off further controversy

@Richard: I can't even decide if it's a good question... or how I would answer it.

Do you mods get to see deleted comments?

wax eagle

8:37 PM

@Flimzy yes we can :)

Flimzy

Handy

wax eagle

@Flimzy yeah, its a fairly new feature

Flimzy

So I can insult you guys in comments, then delete them immediately... and nobody will ever know but you!

Or maybe I'll start sending secret messages that way...

wax eagle

@Flimzy lol, not recommended, remember we can also suspend :)

Flimzy

Hrm, right

I'll have to revise my evil plan further

TRiG

8:39 PM

@Flimzy "I was hoping TRiG would edit his question to get it reopened."

Should I? I've got an answer now, and accepted it. So what would be the point?

Flimzy

I'm curious what a mod would do if someone pasted repeated abusive comments, but always deleted them immediately (and hadn't first admitted they were only trying to insult the mods)

Richard

@Flimzy Wanna find out?

evil-grin

Flimzy

@TRiG: I would still like to see it reopened... I think it's an excellent question. And I think you can re-word it in a way that is neither ambiguous, as in the case of 'they', nor confusing to many as it is now.

DTest

I'm still shocked I didn't get banned for Flagging @Richard last night.

Flimzy

@TRiG: Also, you may still get additional answers, even though you've accepted one.

TRiG

8:40 PM

I mean, I could, if people here think it should be.

Flimzy

@TRiG: And by having it re-opened, you ensure it won't ever get permanently deleted... and you'll probably get a lot more upvotes, which will make it more visible to future vistiors.

TRiG

Not tonight, though. I'm supposed to be preparing a speech for Toastmasters tonight.

Okay.

Flimzy

@TRiG: but it's ultimately up to you...

TRiG

I'll think about it.

It's on the "one of these days" list.

Flimzy

@TRiG: I had a couple suggestions on how to re-word it without ambiguous pronouns... I'd be happy to share that with you if you like... But I'm sure you can come up with something at least as good, if not better, on your own.

TRiG

8:41 PM

And, in case you're wondering, yes I was actually very angry about the way that blew up. Still am, a bit.

wax eagle

I'd always encourage someone with a salvageable closed question to improve it so it can be reopened

Richard

@DTest ;)

wax eagle

@TRiG I understand and am glad you chose to come back.

Flimzy

@TRiG: I hope you understand that my objection to the question has nothing to do with the desire for non-gender specific pronouns... I agree that it is an unfortunate weakness of the English language... and if those new pronouns ever do "catch on" in a wider sense, the language will be better for it.

TRiG

Oh, I wasn't planning on going away. Something on Judaism.SE made me even angrier (and more confused) once.

But I still read there, and occasionally post a question.

Flimzy

8:43 PM

@TRiG: But as someone who's learning another language, I'm perhaps especially sensitive to the needs of non-native speakers....

TRiG

@Flim

try again

@Flimzy. I think the current edit (by whoever) caters for that, no?

Flimzy

@TRiG: Adding the reference at the bottom? It improves it... I don't think it's ideal.

If there was no other way to get around the pronoun issue, I would consider the reference suitable. But I think there are reasonable ways to get around it without the need for that.

But again, it's ultimately up to you... it's your question.

TRiG

@Flimzy. In the places I hang out on the internet, the blogs I read, it's simply normal language. I know a married woman who often refers to her husband with gender-neutral pronouns. And of course some intergender and a few trans* people use them too.

Getting dark. Must put the ducks to bed.

Flimzy

@TRiG: Sure... clearly for new words like that to catch on, they have to first be used in some subset of culture :) That's how all new words make it into the mainstream...

@TRiG: Like the word "robot", which you mentioned on meta...

@Richard: Maybe I'll start a new SE account just so I can start insulting you privately in deleted comments... I can't do it with this account, since you already know my goal! :P

a_hardin

@Flimzy Yeah, I'm sure he'll never figure it out... :)

TRiG

8:53 PM

@Flimzy. Catch-22?

Flimzy

I'll create an account called R1chard... so he thinks its himself!!

wax eagle

@Flimzy sure...

Flimzy

I'll even copy his icon

Richard

@Flimzy LOL

wax eagle

@Flimzy the little diamond might be an issue :)

a_hardin

8:57 PM

@Richard can you ban someone just for being @Flimzy?

wax eagle

@a_hardin maybe a chat ban :) thats only 30 minutes/ban

a_hardin

not that I would want that

Flimzy

@a_hardin: You can admit that you want to ban me... :)

a_hardin

as the Bible says "keep your enemies even closer"

although, I'm pretty sure the Bible doesn't say that

and you're not my enemy

Flimzy

does the Bible actually say that?

hehe, I was gonna say

El'endia Starman

9:06 PM

Sure it does! [tag:wink]

Uriah 2:16 - "And ye shall be close to not only your friends, but your enemies also."

Weird. tagging doesn't work for me anymore! :'(

...what.

a_hardin

lol

maybe not in an edit?

El'endia Starman

Hmmm...
[tag:test]
[tag:br oken]

...blink-blink

wax eagle

@ElendiaStarman maybe not in multiline posts

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle Ah...nod

Richard

@waxeagle Yeah, that's what I've seen.

El'endia Starman

9:08 PM

test1

[tag:test2]

a_hardin

interesting

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle...you are correct.

Flimzy

oh darn

new users can't leave comments

a_hardin

talk-like-a-tag-day

wax eagle

@Flimzy this is true.

El'endia Starman

9:09 PM

@a_hardin lol-capitalized-yes-capitalized-with-an-exclamation-point-too

Flimzy

I can do some edits, then approve them as my real user!

although then it really starts to look like I'm trying to circumvent the system

and that probably wouldn't be viewed to friendly like

a_hardin

@ElendiaStarman [tag:✔]

ahh

El'endia Starman

@ahardin: Yeah, not everything works. [tag:for example]

wax eagle

@ElendiaStarman can't use spaces :)

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle Exactly! :P

Flimzy

9:22 PM

Richard DIAMOND

1

Too bad this poor guy doesn't have enough rep to leave comments!

a_hardin

I wonder if he could put ♦ after his name

wax eagle

@a_hardin nope

@Flimzy hmmm wonders if we should merge that into @Flimzy's acct...

El'endia Starman

@Flimzy Hah! Nice! :P

a_hardin

that was a quick response :)

wax eagle

@a_hardin its been tried...

a_hardin

9:27 PM

I figured by the response

Flimzy

@a_hardin: I can't do a literal ♦, nor an HTML version, as & is not permitted :(

I even tried <>

a_hardin

Considering how normal most names have been, they probably pretty well keep it to alphanumeric

TRiG

@a_hardin. I resent being called normal.

Flimzy

Oops! There was a problem updating your profile:
Display Name can only contain a-z, 0-9, spaces, apostrophes or hyphens and must start with a letter or number

wax eagle

@Flimzy lol you realize this is admitting to sock puppetry and we could totally suspend you right? :)

Richard

9:36 PM

@waxeagle LOL

Flimzy

@waxeagle: Actually, I'm pretty sure that multiple accounts is completely allowed on SE

wax eagle

@Flimzy well as long as you aren't cross voting or getting out a ban its probably at least ok...

Flimzy

@waxeagle: Right... I'm pretty sure I've seen Dori defend multiple accounts pretty rigidly in the past

except when it's to get around restrictions or to be abusive, of course

wax eagle

@Flimzy right. Anyways I don't care enough to do anything and if its an issue there are tools for that :)

Flimzy

4

Q: What's the SO policy about having multiple user accounts?

Take this example: all SO user accounts of user known as "icepax". I can imagine of any human reasons to create a new user account at SO, e.g. willing to restart with a clean (reputation) history. But particular this one is extreme. The user known as "icepax" currently already has 10 accounts, e...

discussion etiquette users multiple-accounts

Maybe it wasn't Dori who defended multiple accounts... or maybe it was in some other context where she did...

anyway, that seems to be the official answer there

wax eagle

9:39 PM

@Flimzy well if Jeff says its ok...

Transcript for