@SethJ You don't have a handy text editor, piece of paper, or the like to hang onto it for a few more days? (That doesn't help with stale-ness, of course.)
@DoubleAA I have fewer than 10,000 reputation points and I can undelete posts. (Or at least answers; those deleted questions seem impossible to find without the actual link.)
@ba Under 10k you can't see deleted questions (even if you have the link, except immediately after you self-delete) or others' deleted answers. You can undelete self-deleted posts.
Over 10k you can see any deleted question or answer. For the questions though you have to have the link or have it in your favorites. You cannot find it your own or anyone else's user profile (except favorites). You can vote to undelete any question (or answer if you have 20k), so long as it wasn't deleted by a mod. It takes three such votes to undelete.
Mods can see deleted posts in a user's user profile, can search for them in the search bar, and all their undelete votes are binding.
@DoubleAA I was just wondering why you pinned the ability to actuate your suggestion to Seth J with having 10,000 reputation although it seems to be possible (as you concede) even with less. (I apologize if this message appears twice; I wrote it half an hour ago and it still hasn't shown up.)
@ba (It doesn't appear twice to me.) It's not possible with under 10k because you can't view even your own deleted questions except immediately after a self delete (ie in case you want to immediately undo before navigating away).
I can demonstrate if you want by giving you the link to your only deleted question, which I found via search. But beware then 10k users will be able to see it (not that that matters much).
@SethJ congratulations! Did you get a haircut? :-)
@IsaacMoses, re this answer of yours, does R. Hirsch cite any sources for that interpretation? (I don't have easy access to Hirsch but I'll bet you do. :-) )
@MonicaCellio At home, I do. He may have quoted some Midrashim are suggestive of the patterns of interpretation he suggests, but I think a lot of it just came from his own close reading of the text, generally informed by being steeped in Midrash, Talmud, and commentaries
@MonicaCellio Cool. If that question were asked on MY, I'd post a similar answer to the one you pointed to here. I don't know enough about BH to know whether R' Hirsch's Oral-Torah-influenced interpretations are on-topic there
@IsaacMoses it wouldn't be off-topic as I understand it, but it probably wouldn't be seen as a particularly strong argument either since they don't hold R. Hirsch in the same esteem we do (he's just another guy...). That's why I asked what he based it on; I'd like to get the info in your answer over there (you can do it or I can, don't care), if we can support it a little better.
I've posted answers there based on talmud and midrash before, BTW, citing/quoting those sources. So that's on-topic for sure (or at least no one's deleted my answers and I've got some rep); it's just the "R. Hirsch says so" part that I'm not so sure about.
(Even when I cite Rashi I try to go back to what Rashi was citing.)
@MonicaCellio I'll see if I can find where he supports these interpretations and provide a scan. It might not be very soon, since I'm about to have houseguests for a few days. If I haven't done this in about a week, and you're still interested, please ping me again.
@IsaacMoses thanks! Enjoy your visit. Today's daf says providing hospitality is greater than greeting the Shechina, but if these are Shabbat guests you don't have to choose, so win-win. :-)
I was wondering if perhaps it would be an idea not to allow a questioner to answer his own question for 24 hours. This would perhaps avoid those asking questions just to ask and just to answer.
" A Jewish Blogger "Mi Yodea" asked his readers: Are there any statistics as to what percentage of Chabad still believes the Rebbe is the Moshiach? Is it the majority or simply a very vocal minority? Have there been any serious studies made on the issue?"
@ShmuelBrin ha! This should be interesting. I wish they'd actually linked to the question, though. (The link that looks like it's that is just a link back to their page.)
Does anyone mind if I remove the first three comments to that question?
@ShmuelBrin Would the following comment be appropriate or inappropriate on that article: Thank you for posting this! A link to the original question is: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/25946/759 We have a number of Chabadnikim active on our site, and we hope you come check it out and contribute as well. A Gutten Chodesh and a Freilichin Purim!
or @HodofHod. Someone who visits that site more than I do (meaning >0).
@ShmuelBrin I'd say not, since it's copying an entire Q&A. Anyway, they shouldn't need to rely on fair use, since the burden of complying with our license is pretty low and consistent with "Ha-omer davar besheim omro" (although, if we think geula has already come ...). Incidentally, one of the answers that they republished has since been deleted on our site.
@DoubleAA I'm inclined to leave it unprotected and watch it. We could get some new users from this, and we don't want to prevent them from commenting (not being able to answer means not being able to touch the post at all). If things degenerate then we can protect it then.
@IsaacMoses of course I do! And depending on whom you ask (on this daf, anyway), hospitality = study OR hospitality > study. Either way you're doing the right thing. :-)
@DoubleAA grr. I wonder if that was a human act or a link-scrubber. (Some blogs remove or de-linkify links.)
@DoubleAA I've commented as "Mi Yodeya user" with subject "Geula Leolam, please":
> The bottom of the page you copied this question and answer from has a copyright notice indicating that you can re-use the material however you want, as long as you link back to the original source of the material. Consistent with this license and with the pattern set by Esther Hamalka of "Haomer davar besheim omro," please edit your post to include this link: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/25946/…
I notice often enough that I or someone else has to suggest asking a new question (especially to newer users) when discussion in comment threads gets too off topic.
I request an addition to the markdown shortcuts such as [edit] and [faq] that would link to currentsite.stackexchange.com/questions...
According to Bab. Shab. 128a, unsalted fish is Muktzeh (because it's inedible, presumably).
So is sushi Muktzeh? Does it make a difference whether the sushi is totally prepared (rolled or plated or whatever - I don't do sushi so my understanding of it may be off) or not?
I was wondering if perhaps it would be an idea not to allow a questioner to answer his own question for 24 hours. This would perhaps avoid those asking questions just to ask and just to answer.
According to Bab. Shab. 128a, unsalted fish is Muktzeh (because it's inedible, presumably).
So is sushi Muktzeh? Does it make a difference whether the sushi is totally prepared (rolled or plated or whatever - I don't do sushi so my understanding of it may be off) or not?
