@JonEricson I read that last time his name came up. Generally, I think him an idiot and makes a big deal out of small potatoes, but among the skeptic community, which is sizable, he is highly respected.

I've already +1 you on that, you rep monger. ;)

@waxeagle Thank's. Markdown was exactly what I was looking for.

@fredsbend np. Being able to see your answers on questions deleted by others when you have the link should be a thing...

@JonEricson Yes, likely, but as written it is still a good question in my mind. As for the user, I would have suspended him for a year about 3 weeks ago. Don't remember what he did, but it set me off as the last straw. However, since I have cooled down I would not do that now. I see another user is gone for a year; he was nothing but trouble.

@waxeagle no shortage of thoughts on this. meta.stackoverflow.com/…

Status declined! what gives?

@fredsbend well POVs have changed on this. You've always been able to see your answers on non-deleted questions. And now you can see your questions if you have a link regardless of deletion status

@fredsbend lol. Jeff's answer is one of hte most downvoted status declined answers ever.

@fredsbend Heh.

@fredsbend I'd rather wait for someone who is really struggling to ask the question. It would be more satisfying to answer, if nothing else.

@fredsbend The issue is not so much whether the propaganda he's trying to get out there is crazy headed or not. I'm not really interested in content censorship. The issue is that it's propaganda. You could link my favorite teacher/preacher but you do it in a way where the obvious point of the post is not to ask a question or answer but to spread an agenda, I'd object to that too.

Besides it was the third or fourth post I'd seen him make with that link inside a few hours (see Islam and Judaism sites) and I know he was just poking around for any places he could get the word out. That's not what our site is for.

When somebody wants to link an interesting resource they usually give it a name. Even if they don't know how to format links nicely we can help clean up. On the other hand when you see people that clearly know how to format links and choose to make their entire sentence or paragraph linked you can be pretty sure their objective is not for you to read what they wrote so much as click through to the link..

Furthermore look at the specific question he's asking. That question is valid (hence why I edited it instead of just closing, and I didn't even downvote!) but if you really want an answer to that question, the book link a distraction. On it's own merit you might get decent answers, but drag Ehrman into it and it will degrade the focus and turn it into a debunk-the-skeptic. At least some of the answers will set out to discredit Ehrman more than they will answer the original question.

@waxeagle It actually is a thing now. The issue there is that the deleted post is not @fredsbend's answer but the question he posted it on. The reason he can't load that one is that it isn't his deleted post you are linking to, it's somebody elses.

Hmm. The You must be logged in to talk message is nearly invisible (white on a white background).

I'm on holiday, but I'm having problems with YouTube and Google+, popped by WebApps, and got pulled in here.

@El'endiaStarman Apparently so. And now I really want to see what's happening back in Mechanicsburg.

@Caleb Get Jon Scalzi to post about it on Whatever, and it would take off in an instant.

Sorry, John Scalzi. But Whatever.

@StackExchange Talk about a leading question!

(The answer is the color scheme, however. ;-)

@JonEricson could be both. I find it harder to read text on this site than on some other light-background sites (though bright white backgrounds are a challenge for me in any case). I suspect that a "weighier" font might stand up against the bombardment of white pixels better. :-) But if you toned the white down to, say, a cream, that would make a big difference. Of course, I'm just talking about my own eyes here and I know I'm weird. :-)