Does anyone else have a better sense of where to send these?

@DoubleAA superuser.com/questions/tagged/web-filtering

@IsaacMoses Shall we give it a try?

@DoubleAA I think it's pretty migration-worthy.

It might make sense to edit out references to "relapsing" before migrating

@IsaacMoses ah well, too late for that. there's still the link to reddit anyway

@DoubleAA Also, the two questions are cross-linked, but to each other here, which is messy. Maybe SU editors will clean that up.

@IsaacMoses If you're not logged in / have sufficient rep? / the links redirect automatically to the target post

@DoubleAA Good. Still.

@IsaacMoses You can suggest an edit if you want

hi folks.

@DoubleAA I don't have sufficient rep. For me, each cross-link redirects automatically to Super User.

@Daniel Capital-L Lord is a title. A title for anyone. It's in no way specific to a deity. See the current sitting Lords Temporal of the House of Lords for some examples. I suppose that using capital-L Lord in running text, not as a title preceding a name, might possibly be seen as specific to God, but I wouldn't count on it.

@DoubleAA Not a Percy French fan?

@TRiG Interesting, perhaps that's a British English phenomenon? At least in American English, when mentioning just a title (as opposed to using the title as part of a name), the title is in lower case. e.g. "Donald Trump is the current president."

vs. "I saw President Donald Trump the other day."

@Daniel The same. I suppose I see your example as the name of a position, while the uppercase one preceding a name is the title.

But don't quote me on that fine distinction.

I don't quite see the distinction

He is the president vs He is President Trump, or even He is President vs He is (the) president of the USA.

right

So it's the same distinction, but it's fine enough that I wouldn't read much into seeing it used differently. So the capital-L version of Lord in running text would not, to me, be a strong signal that the writer is referring to God.

@hazoriz Rambam writes: ויהיה דיבורו .עימה בנחת, ולא יהיה עצב ולא רוגז It seems likely that his usage of the term עצב here is connected with angering and antagonising his wife. See his discussion in Moreh Nevukhim (I:29) of the meaning of the term which can mean to rebel agaisnt, to pain, or to anger. dibbur b'nahat means pleasant and without anger. See Yesodei HaToah 5:11. atsav and ragzan, or rogez refer to his behaviour around her, probably to her, but not to speech in particular. (IT)

@mevaqesh thank you very much (+ very nice reference sources)

any other opinions?

@hazoriz you are very welcome. my pleasure.