e.s. kohen, I appreciate that you're trying to improve this post, and I think you have done so. However, please try to batch your edits together a little more. You have now edited 45 times, each time bumping this post to the top of the "active questions" page. This can be a distraction for those who use that page to view new content. Thanks! — Susan ♦22 hours ago
@PaulVargas There was. As @Davïd pointed out, it's been tried twice. Both times it turned out to be a wasteland of ignorance. Far more people wanting to ask idle curiosity question or answer with uninformed nonsense than there was actual expertise in the field. That's not a viable demographic for an SE site.
BH take notice. Not that we're there, but that's why our insistence on substance in answers and focused questions that hold some interest to actual experts matters.
@JackDouglas Ha ha, thanks. We thought perhaps that was some sort of a record. An honest mistake by all indicators, though.
@Davïd Yeah, I noticed that too (although he's since edited once more). I considered explaining that he meant OCPD rather than OCD, but then I thought there might be some irony there....
Normally in English we can use an indirect object without "to" only when the direct object is named ("I threw him the ball" but not "I threw him"….. or "him" becomes direct.)
But with "pay" it seems like the opposite. We can definitely say, "To whom was he paying the money?" but I'm not sure about "To whom was he paying?".
(Upshot: it would read more naturally to me "Whom was he paying?" but I don't get it so I'm not changing it.)
The Library
The Library