« first day (483 days earlier)      last day (4449 days later) » 

2:00 PM
I do not have that sneaking suspicion
hi @KitFox :) What's causing you this anxiety?
mtg, bbl
 
@Kit @Rob Purple Empire have caught up. Still 17 mins left.
 
@KitFox I didn't before but I do now. Although, wouldn't the summer be the ideal time to finish and roll out improvements?
 
user19161
@brilliant ice cream for you = i give you ice cream, you for ice cream = you like ice cream, I got some ice cream for you, Are you for ice cream?
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Theoretically, but grant funding usually ends in June. I have this feeling that if that don't get more monies, that's it for me.
 
user19161
@MattЭллен I thought you were trying to be ironic. That is why this room is incomprehensible.
 
2:17 PM
@KitFox seems like an odd way of paying for things that are not teachers (i.e. just about anything else in a school that isn't tied to the students' presence).
 
user19161
@brilliant But both slogans are trimmed to the point of awkward incomprehensibility.
 
user19161
@KitFox Is that a bad thing or a good thing?
 
@WillHunting I am not sure.
 
morning, people
 
user19161
@KitFox Well, hang in there. There can be miracles when you believe.
 
user19161
2:22 PM
@JSBᾶngs Boo!
 
@KitFox i don't think you're going to be laid off in june
you're the most competent person at your office
 
@KitFox my advice is to update your resume and start looking for leads. The only miracles you can count on are the ones you make for yourself.
 
It wouldn't be the end of the world. I am hoping my husband is going to get a particular job, then I can quit anyway and stick with consulting and being mommy.
Gotta go.
 
user19161
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Yes, that is the kind I am thinking of.
 
Sorry @Reg, I tried.
 
2:24 PM
Happens.
 
my career goal for the next ~5 yrs is to quit and become a consultant/daddy/writer
so i think your plan sounds swell, @Kit
 
She'd be your competition.
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 Sorry, was commuting.
 
Anyway, speaking of mommy, I have to take the boys out to play. Later!
 
@WillHunting WOW!!! I see now. Thank you.
 
2:26 PM
1 min ago, by RegDwight Ѭſ道
Happens.
 
user19161
@brilliant Well, that's just my opinion, which is usually weird.
 
user19161
@RegDwightѬſ道 Why is everyone saying sorry to reg?
 
@RegDwight Sorry, none of my decks work.
 
@WillHunting I am collecting sorries today. Today is the International Reg Dwight Collects Sorries Day.
 
user19161
@RegDwightѬſ道 It is International Women's Day according to google home page.
 
2:29 PM
QED.
2 mins ago, by RegDwight Ѭſ道
1 min ago, by RegDwight Ѭſ道
Happens.
 
user19161
@RegDwightѬſ道 Life is dukkha.
 
0
Q: First person plural in imperative

user18889Which of the following is more correct to use in a scientific paper? Consider the set A..., Recall that the set A..., Put the set A... or Let us consider the set A..., Let us recall that the set A..., Let us put the set A...

I've seen something like this before.
 
@Vitaly Welcome to the club. LtW has been particularly virulent against my decks lately.
@RegDwightѬſ道 Let us consider that you have.
 
@Robusto I liked his original wording. "I should write a scientific paper, but in english I am a goat." A great question for ELU Lite!
 
user19161
@RegDwightѬſ道 It would make more sense to say "In England, I am a goat".
 
2:33 PM
Okay, so what the hell:
0
Q: Is "for what" a phrase?

PietroI am not able to find the meaning of "for what" (for what is he..). To me it sounds like if something is worse than it appears. Can I say the following? I know for what the life is. Am I saying that I know life is not that easy? Can you give me more simple examples please?

1
Q: Meaning of "know life for what it is"

PietroWhat does know life for what it is mean? Maybe it means something like know what life is really like? Always to look life in the face and to know it for what it is.

Same user, same movie.
Same phrase.
 
user19161
@RegDwightѬſ道 What movie?
 
I don't care.
 
user19161
@RegDwightѬſ道 Well, I voted both as general reference.
 
It's time to go to bed. Good night everyone!
 
user19161
2:42 PM
@brilliant Good night! Let the pizza digest first.
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 Let us consider that you do care and are merely feeling hurt and vulnerable.
 
No I will not let you consider that.
No considering that in this chat.
 
user19161
Today I learnt a new word "quitted".
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 You cannot stop me. I am still considering that. In this very chat.
 
user19161
"Quitted" is a very interesting word, because it contains "qed".
 
user19161
2:48 PM
@Robusto You are considering it in your mind which is outside this chat.
 
@WillHunting My mind has intruded into this chat. See? It did it again.
 
user19161
@Robusto But then again, it is the chat that is in your mind.
 
@WillHunting "I know what it is you saw, for it is also in my mind."
 
user19161
It seems more and more people are citing the OED. Either they subscribed or are in some library.
 
user19161
Or they managed to get a pirated copy from somewhere.
 
2:54 PM
The OED is not the one-stop answer store some people seem to think it is. Like the Google NGram Viewer, it can be used poorly. But since it is the authority on some things, it lends itself to the argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy quite readily.
 
user19161
Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority or argumentum ad verecundiam) is a special type of inductive argument which often takes the form of a statistical syllogism. Although certain classes of argument from authority do on occasion constitute strong inductive arguments, arguments from authority are commonly used in a fallacious manner. Forms The appeal to authority may take several forms. As a statistical syllogism, it will have the following basic structure: : Most of what authority a has to say on subject matter S is correct. : a says p about S. : Therefore, p is ...
 
user19161
For completeness.
 
@WillHunting My statement was already complete. You have added supererogatory explanatory material — training wheels for the uneducated. My assumption is that all literate participants in this chat will require no such elaboration.
 
Hoo iz El Aboration?
 
user19161
3:07 PM
0
Q: What is a good term for someone who refuses to debate an issue from first principles?

Hexagon TilingA neologism would be fine. I was thinking of “ruglifter”, as in someone who is wont to sweep dirt under the rug.

 
user19161
This question and its 8 answers are all at 0, amazing.
 
@WillHunting not that it will change anything but I commented to the author that because of the multiple answers (with no upvotes), the question should be clarified.
 
This should be at -10.
Also, a comment.
@WillHunting the "A neologism would be fine" part is off-topic.
 
also, deleted
 
@Robusto the OED -is- an authority, and a very good one, the most comprehensive one , just maybe not a complete authority.
in the sense that at least they're trying (in comparison to the lesser authorities)
 
user19161
3:11 PM
@Mitch Well, I just voted as not a real question.
 
Hi!
 
user19161
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Wow, you always have the most interesting news for us!
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Wow, pretty awful.
 
@WillHunting I recently noticed the OED is online through my local public library.
 
But you already know I disapprove of the paedophilia craze.
 
3:12 PM
@WillHunting I've been flagging things like that rather than bothering with down voting.
 
@Cerberus craze?
 
user19161
@Mitch No, I meant closevoting, not downvoting. And you can closevote too.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Witch hunt, then.
Harmful to society.
 
@Cerberus I don't know about your country, but in my country I hardly feel that it has reached any kind of witch-hunt status.
 
@WillHunting you can closevote an answer? oops...mixing up yours and @regdwight's examples.
 
3:17 PM
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Really? The impression we get is that it is worst in the US, then Britain, then the rest of Europe. But it's starting here too. We are ignorant peasants with respect to Canada.
Cf. the new law that forbids English parents from entrance to a school playground.
 
user19161
@Cerberus Now we use not only et al but also cf in chat, fascinating.
 
Cf. is nice and short, hehe.
 
user19161
It seems many people use cf when they should just use vide. Comparing is not the same as seeing.
 
@Cerberus Well, there are some places that have some rules that go too far, but it's hardly at the "harmful to society" state. Like, public pools that ban photography. I don't know if there any laws here about people in schoolyards.
 
user19161
But I think they should just use "compare" and "see" instead of resorting to these Latin words.
 
user19161
3:21 PM
eg and ie should be banned too, as well as qed.
 
@WillHunting and words derived from Latin, and those with cognates to Latin.
 
@WillHunting You would be put in chains for eternity!
@Mitch Especially those damn cognates! Very harmful.
 
they're everywhere. nasty.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Forbidding photography would make sense, though of course it would be almost impossible to enforce.
@Mitch Like paedophiles! Eww!
 
@Cerberus yeah. yucky.
 
3:25 PM
Perhaps we should switch to an uncontaminated language.
 
@Cerberus It gets a little silly sometimes. Like, at my kids daycare, they take pictures of the kids and put them up on walls. But they don't let the parents take those pics home unless only their own kid is visible in the pic. And they don't let parents take pics of the kids.
 
Like some obscure language from the heart of Africa.
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Oh, that's stupid.
 
And the only people who are good at surreptitious photography are the creepy people who shouldn't be allowed to take pictures.
 
Exactly. And those creeps cannot be stopped anyway, so just let them have their pictures.
 
I've never understood how a picture of a person in public could be harmful to that person (excepting certain cases like papparazi, etc)
 
user19161
3:26 PM
@MrShinyandNew安宇 That is drastic.
 
@Cerberus Yeah. Actually I'm happy for them to have their pictures as long as they keep their hands off and their privates hidden.
 
I would only act if they did it openly, so that people noticed protested, but not try to prevent it otherwise.
 
@WillHunting It's funny. One time they cut out a 1"x2" part of the picture that had my son in it, so they could give us that part and throw away the rest.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 A swimming pool is in a way a private place where people dare remove their clothes.
 
3:27 PM
Anyway, those are RULEs and not LAWS, so, it doesn't bother me much.
@Cerberus in a way it's private, but in a way it's totally not.
 
It is still a sign of the times.
 
user19161
@Cerberus Though at most pools there is still some swim wear on.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Yes. But I can understand why you would in theory not want people to take pictures of others in a swimming pool against their will.
 
Nah, it's not so much a sign of the times, it's a sign of the old times coming to terms with a relatively instantaneous explosion in the number of cameras out there.
@Cerberus Yeah, it's not just "for the children". But it's still completely harmless.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 to be honest this response is probably as a result of some high profile cases last year, where children were badly abused because authorities didn't intervene despite the evidence
 
3:29 PM
@WillHunting Yes, but still, it is like, "we're all semi-nude together, so I will put aside my shame".
@MrShinyandNew安宇 What is completely harmless?
 
@MattЭллен But security theatre is not a good response to security threats.
@Cerberus photography
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 it isn't, but it's what the public expects
 
Well, I wouldn't like someone's putting a picture of me in trunks on some weird dating site.
 
oh, errr, then I have some bad news @Cerberus
 
@MattЭллен Not really. What the public expects is action of any kind. If the government instead tightened up procedures or fired negligent people, that should suffice.
 
3:31 PM
Waaah!
 
@Cerberus But that's completely different from taking a picture, and also malice can't be prevented by laws.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Just saying that semi-nude pictures are a bit more sensitive than ordinary pictures. But, again, trying to prevent this is futile, and it harms society more than the thing to be prevented.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 this is a tightening up of procedures, of a sort - they're being stricter on people found in possession of child porn
 
@MattЭллен Phew, they took it down in time.
 
3:33 PM
@Mitch I'm just saying that citing the OED may or may not prove a given argument. It is definitive for some things, but not at all an authority on other things. The fact that there is an entry for a word from 1637 does not make it relevant to a question about modern usage, for example.
 
I also feel that paedophiles should have free access to old and fictional child porn.
Like methadon.
 
@Cerberus I'm fine with fictional. Not fine with old.
 
@Cerberus If you didn't hate Apple so much you might check out their iPaed.
 
Why not?
If those "children" have grown old and died anyway...
 
Well, let's get the terms straight. "child porn" is porn where one of the participants is a child. By "old" do you mean "it was made a long time ago"?
 
3:35 PM
@Robusto Hawt!
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Yes.
 
The only legitimate reason I can see for preventing the creation of child porn is that the creation of that porn harms children. So in that case I don't think it's any consolation that the harmed person isn't around anymore. They were still harmed.
But if the person in the image is not a child, then no children were harmed.
 
But the watching of it later doesn't harm the child any more. The main reason not to let people watch child porn is that we want to discourage the abuse of children; but I think being allowed to watch it 50 years later is not an incentive at all to produce child porn, so what harm does allowing it do?
 
A guy in Canada was arrested and put on trial for painting pictures that suggested adults having sex with children.
That was some time ago, I don't remember how the details turned out. But it seemed stupid.
 
Wait, a sec. All photographic or video child porn happened in the past, and in many cases the children harmed are adults now. I don't see how that makes a difference. Kiddie-porn is kiddie-porn, whether the children harmed are still children, grown adults, or long dead.
 
@Cerberus No, I think it's not watching that's harmful. It's creation of the porn that's harmful.
 
3:38 PM
@MrShinyandNew安宇 The other reason is that living people will not like it if someone else is using their baby pictures as porn. They might find them in the government database even, if they are paedophiles themselves.
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Very.
That's the witch hunt.
 
@Cerberus Well, I already agreed with you that looking at pictures is harmless.
 
@Robusto See what I said about incentive, and about finding your own picture somewhere and being unable to have it removed.
 
I think you have to have something like the elephant ivory laws. We ban the sale of ivory, even that which was in circulation before the law went into effect, because we wish to discourage (and criminalize) the harm that may be done to elephants today.
 
@Robusto With elephant ivory it can be very hard to ascertain the age of the ivory conclusively.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 It's not harmless if you and your friends are confronted with a picture of you as a child: that is humiliating, and it reminds you of a traumatic experience. The law should protect you against that, just as it protects adults from finding their adult picture on some regular porn site without their permission.
 
3:41 PM
@Cerberus So do you think the nude photos that Charles Lutwidge Dodgson took of the child Alice Pleasance Liddell should be freely available?
 
But the regular laws serve do prevent that anyway.
 
So are you saying that we should ban all creation of any future child porn, lock up the rest, then make it available in 100 years?
 
@Robusto And I am wondering what good that will do. What I propose would put the onus on the publisher/sharer to prove that the pictures are old. Similarly, ivory traders could be make to prove that their ivory was old.
@Robusto Who?
 
@Cerberus Lewis Carroll.
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Yeah, for example.
 
3:43 PM
@Robusto Were those pictures "porn"?
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Define "porn" ...
 
@Robusto "I'll know it when I see it"?
 
And family members would still have the right to have pictures taken down at any time upon request.
 
@Robusto images created or used for the purpose of sexual arousal
 
Yes. And I have never seen them. I just read that he did so, and that Alice's parents were not amused.
 
3:45 PM
@MattЭллен Some people get aroused by odd things that aren't human...
2
 
@MattЭллен That is a very fine line.
 
@Cerberus then that's porn - to them
 
Anyway, it's my understanding that completely fictional child porn, such as a drawing, is not illegal in the US, but I admit to not being an expert on the matter.
 
@Robusto yes it is
 
@MattЭллен All right, seems like a good definition.
 
3:46 PM
all I'm saying is porn is subjective. which is a bit tautological really
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 I would be in favour of allowing photoshopped real children's pictures.
@MattЭллен I agree. The only problem is that this subjective property cannot always be seen just by looking at the picture. So it might be a difficult definition to maintain by law...
 
Meh. I'll put it this way: I'm against people who prey on children, whether sexually or any other way. And as I'm at work and very busy, and as this whole topic tends to make me angry, I am going to withdraw.
 
@Cerberus absolutely. I find a lot of laws about porn to be ridiculous
 
Hmm like which?
Are there many laws about porn? Or do you mean in exotic countries?
 
@Cerberus (in the UK) you may not take pictures of violent sex acts unless you are participating in them, even if all participants want you to
 
3:50 PM
@MattЭллен oh yeah, that one... teehee
 
but I agree with Robusto, I do not want people to take advantage of children. I do not want the produce of such crime to ever become acceptable
releasing old stuff is condoning its production
 
@MattЭллен or tantamount to, anyway
 
@MattЭллен Oh, hmm...that may not be fair in itself, but perhaps it serves another purpose? Perhaps it has been proved that, in practice, not having this law stimulates rape? (I find that unlikely, but hey.)
We are all the produce of rape and murder.
We all profit from the crimes of our ancestors.
 
that is different and you know it
 
It is usually best for society not to dig too deep into the past.
 
3:55 PM
by making the old stuff available that's exactly what you are doing
destroy it.
 
I don't think it is good to try and enforce justice as far back as possible: there is a reason for statutes of limitations.
@MattЭллен I think it is already available: people probably keep circulating it.
 
not for actual proven child porn. there is no need to have a statue of limitation for destroying it
 
How about forbidding it?
 
forbidding what?
child porn is already illegal
 
Forbidding people from possessing it.
From possessing material that is very old.
 
3:58 PM
yes, deliberately possessing images produced by abusing children should be illegal
unless you have a very good reason
 
I don't know.
 
Possession of child porn is illegal in canada.
 
I'd also like to make a distinction between the degree of harm.
I've never seen actual child porn except the heavily censored bits in news reports.
So I imagine there is a wide spectrum from a child posing nude to the unspeakable.
 
Usually the government has a narrower definition of what is considered child porn under the law. Simply having a photo of a nude child does not count, in canada.
Otherwise just about every parent would be guilty.
 
@Cerberus yes, I can agree with that. My parents have pictures of me naked, as baby - that's not porn to them, so that's great. If I had been kidnapped and stripped and photographed naked on some creepy old guy's knee, that is really really bad
 
4:04 PM
@MrShinyandNew安宇 I think some artist in Europe was forbidden from displaying a photo of a nude underaged girl at an exhibition?
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Yes, and that is what I find worrying. It may come to that in America. Seriously, I wouldn't be extremely surprised if some law were proposed banning all pictures of nude children.
@MattЭллен Exactly. And there is worse stuff.
 
@Robusto Yes, I agree, in the sense that I'm saying it is not perfect, some judgement must be used. But the OED is not as bad as NGrams, and that is not as bad as wiktionary and that is not as bad as urban dictionary (to the extent that any of these are comparable)
 
I think focus should lie on preventing harm from being done to children, as in making young children do sexual stuff with adults.
 
If a law does not further this goal, what purpose does it serve?
 
@Cerberus making people feel better about that goal, I guess.
 
4:08 PM
What do you mean?
Oh, I see.
Yes, and that is wrong.
 
So while I find it slightly ridiculous that I can't take pictures at my kids' daycare, that causes me about as much "harm" as it does to make people feel better about their kids safety.
What I find worrying about that is the mistaken notion that preventing photography will make kids safer. Most kids are harmed by people they KNOW.
 
I think your freedom should only be restricted if the harm prevented is much greater than the harm done.
 
There's a murder trial in Ontario right now. An 8 year old girl was taken away, and ultimately murdered. She willingly walked off with her kidnapper, because she KNEW that person.
 
Yes, that is what these laws should be focusing on.
But people should also accept that crime cannot be eradicated.
 
@Cerberus nah, there are limitations. For example, it is a daycare policy that prevents me from taking pictures, not a government restriction. So, whatever. They can prevent whatever they want on whatever pretext they want.
@Cerberus yes, this.
 
4:11 PM
Children will be murdered until eternity, and there is nothing we can do to stop it entirely.
@MrShinyandNew安宇 True.
I think the current Zeitgeist is that people want 100 % security.
 
@Cerberus murder them all now. then none can be murdered again!
 
Especially in America, Puritans as they are, but also in Britain, and in Europe.
@MattЭллен Haha, very good idea!
I think it would also be a good thing for people to realize that we have millions of paedophiles, and that 99 % are good citizens.
 
millions out of 7 billion, or millions in The Netherlands?
 
Another thing is that merely having a child pose nude or touching it a bit without any use of force should not be extremely harmful: a moderate punishment should be enough.
 
@Cerberus That is going to depend a lot on the definition of pedophile.
 
4:15 PM
@MattЭллен I have no idea, actually. But it could be 10 % of the population: who knows?
 
@Cerberus That's a tricky line to walk.
 
true, I suppose we have no stats on un-caught paedos
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Yes. Two definitions come to mind: 1. someone who is at all attracted to children; 2. someone who is exclusively attracted to prepubescent children.
@MrShinyandNew安宇 How do you mean?
@MattЭллен Uncaught mainly because they never did anything unlawful!
 
@Cerberus Well, you're trying to establish degrees of child porn, based on the harm done to the child. I mean, it's possible to "harm" a child when taking a non-porn picture. When does that become a crime? What about if it cannot be determined how much "harm" a child might have come to? Also remember that many child porn victims remain unidentified.
anyway, I think some of the rules and laws go too far, but hardly so far that I'd call it a "witch hunt". And with that said, I have to go. cya folks
 
4:23 PM
cya @MrShinyandNew :)
 
@MrShinyandNew安宇 I think there should be reasonable evidence that an act is harmful to children for it to be forbidden by law.
Bye!
 
yes, there should
well, not for anything :D
I don't want people stealing my stuff just because it won't hurt children
bah, the internet crapped out for a moment
 
Hahaha.
What if children steal your stuff naked?
 
then it's ok for people to take photos of them
two wrongs make a right
 
Eww you perv, you want two crimes in one picture!
Jinx.
 
4:30 PM
@Cerberus what is the beverage of your choice?
 
Eh huh?
Tea?
 
your jinx reward - soda of your choice
 
puzzled look
Oh!
 
Yay! But...do you have some with milk?
I am a Brit at heart, after all.
 
4:32 PM
I'll look
@Cerberus yay!
 
Perfect!
I posted the Asterix bit where the Brits drink tea, didn't I?
 
the lighting on the first cup makes it look somewhat unreal
@Cerberus yeah :D
 
OK good.
 
I remember reading that one as a child :)
 
Same.
Is Asterix popular in England?
 
4:34 PM
I especially like how the battled stopped for tea
@Cerberus It certainly used to be
 
I know!!
@MattЭллен Ah OK, same here.
 
I don't know any more.
 
Neither do I.
Hey fox, are the Asterix and Obelix comic books popular in America?
Oh I have to run.
Later!
 
OK! have fun :)
 
Tea with milk is abomination.
 
4:38 PM
runs off before anyone can grab photo camera
 
singular noun without article is abomination
@Cerberus snaps a photo of your foot
 
Tea with milk is worse than any amount of articles or lacks thereof.
 
@RegDwightѬſ道 next you'll be telling me you have apple pie without custard
 
I don't have apple pie so I can't tell.
 
christmas pudding?
 
4:40 PM
Last I checked (around December 28th), it wasn't Christmas.
 
or is that a British peculiarity too
@RegDwightѬſ道 have you eaten christmas pudding?
 
I have no idea what you consider christmas pudding.
But I have eaten many things.
 
that is christmas pudding
with or without holly
 
Hm
I dunno
 
I think it's a suet based sponge cake with fruit in it
it might not be suet based
 
4:43 PM
Hello.
 
How's things?
 
well, they were a little heated, but they're good now!
how're things with you?
 
What were you all arguing about this time?
Oh, I'm good.
Finished my French poster early.
 
@Mahnax child porn laws
 
4:44 PM
@MattЭллен Ah.
 
@Mahnax jolly good
 
@MattЭллен I agree.
 
@Mahnax but that time has passed and we're talking about cake, pies and pudding
 
@MattЭллен Oooh, yummy.
 
indeed :)
 
4:46 PM
That Christmas pudding looks delicious.
 
it does! and filling
 
I made cream puffs the other day.
 
so I read. they were popular, no?
 
They were a success, I suppose.
 
you only suppose?
whence cometh the doubt?
 
4:48 PM
The cream was in a bit of an odd state, so some people's puffs felt a bit waxy on the inside.
But not everyone's.
 
interesting
 
Actually, most were fine.
Do you cook, @Matt?
 
not in any competent capacity
 
Aww.
 
I can boil stuff, and stir fry things together with preprepared sauces from jars
or put a pie in the oven, but I don't make the pie
I don't do the hard work
 
4:51 PM
Stir fry is good.
 
mmmmm yeah
 
As are boiled potatoes.
With salt, butter, and pepper.
 
or roast ones. mmmmmmmm
I'd maim for a good roasty
this made me chuckle
3
A: What is the intended pronunciation of "gist" (as in gist.github.com)?

Morons"jist" is correct. Gist is an actual English word, you can look it up in the dictionary

 
Haha...
 
the username "Morons" adds to the effect
 
4:54 PM
Yep.
But why is it grey?
Deleted, I suppose.
 
I think it means that the question has been migrated and the user has not claimed it
it also means deleted
but this is like unregistered, but not the same as
 
user19161
@Mahnax I like potatoes with sour cream and bacon.
 
I seem to have got a lot of rep back at programmer.se, I guess there was a re-recalc
 
@WillHunting Yum.
Gotta run, Bio!
 
@Mahnax bio! :)
 

« first day (483 days earlier)      last day (4449 days later) »