The Upper Room

dancek

2:06 AM

Good morning!

I was gone a couple of days.

El'endia Starman

@dancek: Welcome back then! :D

dancek

@ElendiaStarman thanks!

El'endia Starman

Huh...9 down-votes in 6 days. I'm pretty sure at least some of that is deliberate. Especially considering that I had 1 down-vote in the 14 days prior... =.=

Wait. Make that 10 downvotes in 6 days.

dancek

2:30 AM

@ElendiaStarman I'm getting two downvotes a day on average. It's a little sad when you know an answer doesn't deserve it, but really it's so little it doesn't matter.

nope, I miscalculated, I'm certainly getting more

El'endia Starman

2:42 AM

@dancek: Wait...can you see the -1 reps I've given myself for downvoting?

dancek

@ElendiaStarman no. (whoops, I miscalculated mine once again!)

@ElendiaStarman ok, looking at your rep stats I agree you're getting a lot of downvotes compared to upvotes.

El'endia Starman

@dancek Exactly!

@dancek Drat. There goes my plan... :P

El'endia Starman

3:25 AM

@HedgeMage: [smacks fingers with a ruler]

0

A: Is Metatron actually part of Catholic dogma?

I grew up as a catholic and quite active in church. The name 'Metatron' first came to my notice here and I had to seaerch in web to get more information. St. Michael, St. Gabriel and St. Rahael are the only one I remember mentioned by name in catholic churches. Michael is referred often as arch-a...

:P

Stack Exchange

0

Q: Visually distinguish Bible quotes from other quotes

I'd like to see Bible quotes have a style of their own. They're very centric to the site, but we have a lot of other quotes, too. It would be great to be visually able to distinguish them. A possible implementation would be to have a "hint" not unlike the syntax highlighting language hints used ...

El'endia Starman

@StackExchange @Caleb: This feed is awesome. :D

wax eagle

3:45 AM

wow, tag badge in discussion already..

dancek

@waxeagle gz!

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle Nice!

El'endia Starman

5:46 AM

christianity.stackexchange.com/unanswered

Darn, didn't onebox, but I wanted to show that there are 0 unanswered questions. :D

@Fabian: The bottom 10 questions here all have at least 1 downvote. Shouldn't the SE engine be able to detect such a systematic down-voting?

The next 6 questions also all have at least one downvote.

Fabian

@ElendiaStarman The detection works per user, as far as I know. I don't think generally downvoting questions from different users is reversed automatically. But it could be that this would also be detected, the details are not public, even mods don't know exactly how this works. The vote-reversal script also runs every 24 hours, so it might take a while anyway.

El'endia Starman

@Fabian I see. Okay.

dancek

9:56 AM

7

Q: Would it have been possible for Jesus to sin?

I think most, if not all of us, agree that Jesus did not sin. However, the devil tempted Jesus, at least in the wilderness, prior to Jesus' public ministry (Matthew 4:1-11). Does this mean it would have been possible for Jesus to sin? Or was the devil just too stupid to realize his efforts wer...

sin jesus

deleted my answer and voted to close

Richard

2:01 PM

We have a lot of "baby" questions and I'm sure that at least one of them is a duplicate: Are we born sinners?, What about unborn babies?, and Do Children go to Heaven?

Then theres When are children held accountable for their sins? and Where does prevenient grace originate in the Bible?. They're probably not duplicates of each other or the other three, but I thought I'd mention them to help ween down duplicates.

Any thoughts?

DTest

Personally, I see those first 3 being different 'enough' questions.

wax eagle

@Richard looks like 5 questions all different, but centered around a similar topic.

dancek

the view on original sin matters a lot on all of them

wax eagle

@dancek very true, but I think they all ask about different aspects of the concept

dancek

@waxeagle I agree. I guess original sin is significant for half the questions you even can ask about Christian faith

wax eagle

2:11 PM

@dancek it is kind of foundational, in that without it we don't have much need for a perfect savior...

dancek

btw the first of the listed questions is mine, and it's still missing a good answer

Richard

I think the What about unborn babies? question would be the duplicate of the other two. Do children go to heaven? is specifically asking about children instead of unborn babies, but I think that any answer there could (but not necessarily will) cover that...

Yeah, OK. I can see leaving them all.

It just seems that we keep going over the same material.

@dancek Yeah, I noticed that.

dancek

@waxeagle well, it could also be that it's possible not to sin but it's very hard, and the first time you've sinned you'd be doomed without Jesus. then we'd have ~10 billion people in history who needed salvation, and ~10k that were good on their own... just to speculate wildly :)

wax eagle

@Richard the only reason i see to leave it open is that some denominations (Catholicism for one) require a child to be baptized before they would consider them "allowed" into heaven

dancek

@Richard that's true and it feels a little problematic. OTOH we only have so many Bible passages, and almost everything in life is related to some of them.

Richard

2:15 PM

@waxeagle I agree. There really isn't any distinction between unborn babies and children in my mind, but I can see how some people can easily find a big difference.

wax eagle

@Richard I see none either (even though I'm an IB advocate, I don't think its mandatory....)

Richard

I think my problem is that from my standpoint, all these are the same. But that's not true of all doctrines.

wax eagle

@dancek yeah, if you subscribe to probability theory, if it was possible to be sinless (even 1 in 100 billion) Christ wouldn't have needed to come :)

Richard

Or he would've only needed to come for the other 99.9999999% (I think that's the correct number of nines)

wax eagle

@Richard yeah, but I'm pretty sure if even one of us was capable of saving ourselves it would lessen the power of him coming/living/dying/resurecting/etc significantly less important.

Richard

2:18 PM

@waxeagle That's definitely true.

dancek

@waxeagle is that the presbyterian teaching btw? Because Lutherans are very careful not to say anything conclusive about what happens to non-baptized babies, like "we just don't know but IT'S YOUR CHILD'S ETERNITY AT STAKE SO ARE YOU REALLY GOING FOR A 50-50"!

wax eagle

@dancek Presbyterians are the same way, the westminister confession basically says "we hope they go to heaven" but we can't say it conclusively

dancek

@waxeagle ok. Hope I didn't offend anyone :o

wax eagle

they do suggest that the children of believers have a better chance, but I don't think it mandates baptism

Richard

Through all of these discussions and questions, I'm surprised that no one has brought up some of the extra-biblical texts, such as the books about the kids who died, went to heaven, and returned.

wax eagle

2:25 PM

Here we go. This is the presbyterian stance on the subjects of infants

> III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who works when, and where, and how He pleases:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]

from here: reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs

basically, if elect infants exist, they are saved.

dancek

so basically baptism doesn't matter, since they were elect from the beginning?

wax eagle

@dancek xactly

its stems from the idea that if you are elect God will call you irresistably.

and that once called you ain't gettin away :)

dancek

@waxeagle i see

I have great trouble understanding predestination, and I like to avoid thinking about it :)

wax eagle

@dancek lol. well as long as you realize that it has little direct effect on how you live (you don't know the future, only god does). Its really not a big deal. Its actually a bit freeing in the ministry front, you know God will call those he will and you are just the vehicle

2

you still do your best, but realize that you can't mess up God's plan

dancek

@waxeagle good point about ministry, hadn't thought about that.

wax eagle

2:38 PM

@dancek note: predestination <> license to sit on your bum

:)

Richard

@waxeagle I can see how that argument could be made (isn't this the argument from the Almish?), but I almost see it as the opposite: It gives you the empowerment to be free from the rejection that comes from "witnessing".

Amish.

@waxeagle You made such a great point up here.

wax eagle

@Richard yeah that's exactly it. You know that God does what he wills in the hearts of his elect, thus your mandate is to preach the gospel and let God do the work.

dancek

3:29 PM

-1

Q: Why does God allow innocent people to believe wrong or false teachings?

Lets take a hypothetical example: A new Christian discovers this site. He posts a certain question about what a specific Bible verse means. He finally receives a response but the answer is incorrect. The user sees the answer as the correct meaning of the Bible verse. Why would God allow this t...

god nature-of-god bible-interpretation

sigh, vtc

Richard

@dancek I agree. I don't see this as constructive.

dancek

4:42 PM

@ahardin I don't quite understand what you're getting onto with your comment in the sinning question

Richard

I think that might be off-topic for the question and the answer. That line of comments leads here: Can there be free will in heaven?

dancek

@Richard I thought of that question too. I do believe we will sin for our entire lives, and that we won't sin in heaven. I don't have scripture to back that up.

El'endia Starman

5:07 PM

I like how we're starting to have a good number of "meaty" questions (the ones that are interesting and actually require a bit of research)... :D

Richard

@ElendiaStarman Yeah, I was hoping that this would happen once we got past all the basic stuff. I had a strong feeling we had to get the basics out of the way first, though. I'm glad to see more "expert level" stuff out there, too

DTest

5:21 PM

dumb question...but what's the code to make a strikethrough ?

wax eagle

@DTest triple dash on each side

in chat

~~test~~

DTest

@waxeagle thanks

wax eagle

@DTest np :)

Richard

triple dash? ~~test~~

Huh. that's interesting.

wax eagle

@Richard ayup

DTest

5:25 PM

~~test~~

hm, doesn't seem to be working in an answer

wax eagle

@DTest I don't think it does, you can try the html <strike>

not sure if it will work

DTest

@waxeagle that did it

wax eagle

@DTest not sure how helpful strike through is in an answer though?

Richard

@waxeagle Heh. At least it's not blinking!

wax eagle

@Richard too true

DTest

5:28 PM

@waxeagle I've seen some people do it as a visible revision history. I was thinking about making it a background color of ...*insert obnoxious color*

wax eagle

@DTest :(

@DTest this is what the actual revision history is for :)

El'endia Starman

Oooo...I may have found the one that downvoted a bunch of questions: christianity.stackexchange.com/users/279/sklivvz?tab=reputation

2 days ago. Should have had +18 net but only had +5 net. That's 13 downvotes...

wax eagle

@ElendiaStarman lol maybe, but he is in the room :) you can ask him

also, don't waste your time figuring out who downvoted, way more trouble than its worth

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle [looks] Indeed, he is technically in the room. Not active though.

@waxeagle Is "I'm bored" a good enough excuse? :P

wax eagle

@ElendiaStarman lol sure :)

El'endia Starman

5:31 PM

Also, it was kinda fun figuring out how to find the source of such a spread of downvotes; given downvotes don't appear to other people...

Richard

Speaking of downvotes, I noticed that "yesterday", several high-rep people had multiple (2-3) downvotes out of the blue.

Flimzy

I got a bunch of down votes either yesterday or the day before

Richard

I couldn't figure out who did it though (if anyone in particular)

DTest

@richard it was me muahaha

Richard

Heh. :P

Sklivvz

5:37 PM

@ElendiaStarman I downvoted a bunch of answers (and left the reason). If you have any specific question, I'll be happy to explain... :-)

None of it was serial down voting, though. I only serially down vote low quality :-)

El'endia Starman

@Sklivvz Oh, okay. I have no problem with that.

It's just that someone downvoted a whole bunch of questions.

Richard

@ElendiaStarman It certainly appears that way.

Sklivvz

Mmm no, I don't think that was me, sorry.

wax eagle

@ElendiaStarman that won't show in rep, those are free :)

El'endia Starman

@Sklivvz That's fine. :P

@waxeagle [facepalm] Wow. I'm an idiot. :P

wax eagle

5:39 PM

@ElendiaStarman :) tis ok

Richard

@ElendiaStarman Wow. You're not the only one!!

Yeah, I was looking through them, too.

Has anyone (obvious) been banned for irregular voting habits? (Besides "rpeg")

wax eagle

@Richard lol, I'm not sure, there are some automatic things in place, there are bans for sock puppets, not sure about irregular voting.

there are some tools for mods to detect irregular voting

but its usually a great number of votes towards one user from another user

Sklivvz

Irregular voting just rolls back. I think rpeg was banned for other reasons.

Flimzy

@Richard: I wonder if you might feel like elaborating on your answer to my question about Jesus protesting before his first miracle. I like what you've said so far, but I feel like more could be said... perhaps including the times when Jesus finally mentions that his hour has come.

wax eagle

@Sklivvz he was, although his current ban is for "irregular voting" I think it has to do with his socks

Flimzy

5:43 PM

@Richard: If you don't feel like elaborating, that's fine... I may take some time to form my own answer... but I'll have to research more first :)

Richard

@Flimzy Oh yeah! I meant to post a reply to your comment (on the answer).

@Flimzy Unfortunately, it's not a complete answer, more just an adjunct. I didn't ever mean to post a nice, full answer of this. However, you bring up an interesting question here. I'm going to do some more research and find out. :)

Flimzy

@Richard: Cool... :) Still 2 days before the bounty expires... so I'll probably wait until tomorrow before I do an in-depth research of my own, if I feel there's still stuff that needs to be answered.

@Richard: I'm usually quite impressed with the quality and depth of your answers, though... so if you want to look into it more, I'd love to hear your thoughts :)

DTest

@flimzy i read the 'lot' tag as 'lol' in light of your last sentence in that question

Flimzy

@DTest: lol!

:P

Richard

:D That's funny.

a_hardin

5:49 PM

@dancek @Richard's link covers what I was trying to get to in that question

dancek

@a_hardin ok, good!

Flimzy

@DTest: BTW, I'm open for tag suggestions (although I think lol probably isn't a good one :)

DTest

@flimzy aww :( but seriously, lot is fine. I'm wondering if 'sodom-and-gomorrah' would be useful ?

Flimzy

I just added 'sodom', since that tag apparently already existed

but then I clicked on it, and it had no questions

so maybe sodom-and-gomorrah is better

I got an unexplained down vote on that question

I really think we have some sort of down-voting troll(s)

dancek

area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/11655/christianity <- wow, it's amazing how active this site is (though questions/day is probably a bit unhealthy)

a_hardin

6:03 PM

@Flimzy Yeah, we had them on day 1

Flimzy

I suppose they're monitored, and irregular voting patterns are flagged for moderator attention

@Danceck: Unhealthy in what way? You think we have too many questions per day?

wax eagle

@dancek its on it way down

dancek

@Flimzy we have a lot of questions that are mediocre at best. It'd be better to just have 5 good questions a day at this point, imo.

of course if we had 30 great questions everyday, it'd be excellent!

Flimzy

@danceck: I suspect any new beta has an onslaught of "easy" questions... all the questions everyone was thinking of when they hit 'commit'

and it'll even out over time

Richard

6:18 PM

@Flimzy There's a more complete answer. I learned a lot writing that answer! Really fascinating stuff. (Well, it's fascinating to me. I didn't know that stuff before) ;)

It actually answered my question here:

0

A: Why did Jesus not want to be known as the Messiah?

Jesus was attempting to hide the fact that he was the Messiah. But, it's not because he was afraid of the local authority. Rather, he was trying to delay the events of his death. He knew that the timing had to be perfect and these events recorded in Matthew were "too soon". Part 1: The secret...

Flimzy

@Richard: I like that answer a lot better... it's in line with the sort of vague idea of an answer I had in mind, too.

Richard

@Flimzy Thanks. I learned about that topic a long time ago, but couldn't remember the argument for it or the answer to the Messianic Secret. I'm glad I was able to figure it out.

@Flimzy Ooh, thank you Flimzy! :)

Flimzy

hehe

it looks like you earned two bounties from me today

time to post a few more I suppose

Richard

6:52 PM

Thanks! I'll pass it on with a bounty of my own.

Jonathon Byrd

oh boy... I'm totally slowing down in my hunt for rep

wax eagle

@JonathonByrd lol, its ok :) have you hit the q limit yet?

Richard

@waxeagle q limit? Is there a question limit or is that just the daily rep cap?

Jonathon Byrd

@waxeagle I thought that I was close, but i havent hit it yet

Richard

0

Q: Biblical basis against the doctrine of the Trinity

What is the Biblical basis against the doctrine of the Trinity? What verses are used against the doctrine of the Trinity?

trinity

duplicate...

wax eagle

7:04 PM

@Richard 50 on a rolling month period

Richard

@waxeagle WaH!? Wow. That is good to know! Is there an answer limit, too?

Wow. Meta.so says 6 per day, too.

wax eagle

@Richard not that I know of

@Richard you don't appear to be in danger of hitting the 50/mo limit. Jbyrd on the other hand :)

@JonathonByrd 42...10 days left to hit it :)

Richard

No, I'm not worried myself. It's just surprising.

wax eagle

@Richard there is a blog post about it

Richard

I need to start trolling the blog.

wax eagle

7:08 PM

Stack Overflow Blog: Optimizing For Pearls, Not Sand

Posted by Jeff Atwood on June 13th, 2011

In March 2010, we rebalanced our reputation system to favor answers.

While we value good questions (and asking a great question is absolutely an art), we want to explicitly encourage people to provide the best possible answers. Without people interested in providing good answers, the questions are moot. We know that answers have more intrinsic value than questions, and the reputation balance should reflect that.

The question asker already enjoys a substantial benefit beyond reputation gain from upvotes on their question — namely, they get great answers to their question! Thus, the asker shouldn’t need as much reputation gain. …

this is actually a really relevant post for our site btw..

dancek

@waxeagle yes, it is

Richard

@waxeagle Yeah, you're right.

dancek

@waxeagle also of interest is the quote by @Mark Trapp in the post. Mark's been writing some good quality-related posts on our meta, too.

wax eagle

@dancek yes he has

in other words, downvote bad questions more often. I need to practice this more

wax eagle

8:00 PM

man I love it when folks re-write history to make modern points :)

Richard

@waxeagle LOL

Any question in particular?

wax eagle

28

Q: Does wine really mean wine in the Bible?

In discussions I have had in the past over the acceptability of a Christian drinking alcohol I have heard that some 'dry' believers say that the wine in the Bible is not wine as we know it commonly today. It is actually grape juice. I personally believe that the wine of Jesus' day is the wine t...

bible history alcohol wine interpretation

specifically the heavily dv'd answer

Richard

Aah, that's a good one.

wax eagle

@Richard does anyone with a history degree actually believe that?

Richard

@waxeagle Huh. I just realized that I don't know anyone with a history degree.

wax eagle

8:04 PM

we will see if my comment gets posted to the article he reff'd...

@Richard lol, I know a few folks, I might have to ask one.

not sure if any of them specialize in that ancient of history though

Flimzy

Wow

I really don't like that zie stuff

I can imagine it would confuse the vast majority of non-native speakers, and a large number of native ones

wax eagle

@Flimzy yeah its a pain, not sure if its worth editing to deal with or not. I guess its OP's pref

Flimzy

Yeah, I just commented... maybe the OP will agree

if not, I won't edit it

He probably wont

I think he likes to argue just to hear himself argue sometimes

dancek

@Flimzy I get the same feeling

I don't think anyone would use such words here, knowing how grammar/spelling can be edited, unless they really wanted to use those exact words.

I also feel the question is more a flamebait than an honest question, but can't quite put my finger on what's wrong there.

Flimzy

Yeah, I agree.

We could bring up a meta question about pronouns, and probably easily get a consensus that we should use gender-specific ones

wax eagle

8:14 PM

> I was brought up as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, but am now an atheist.

TRiG

404 9

sin doctrine faith worship god sexuality unbelievers

Flimzy

No. It's not artificial. It's the way I speak and write. And it's staying.

Okay, time for a meta question

dancek

@Flimzy sigh

Richard

I edited it. Can't have zie and zir. Unacceptable. Sorry guys.

dancek

@Flimzy I'm gonna be waving singular they around in meta if no one else will...

Richard

I hope we don't get into an edit war. ;)

Grace Note

8:17 PM

A meta question on gender specific pronouns?

wax eagle

A wild @GraceNote appears

Grace Note

I've been in here for a while

wax eagle

@GraceNote lol didn't notice you :)...

Grace Note

However fitting that reference lands

wax eagle

your avatar keeps changing...

Stack Exchange

8:19 PM

-1

Q: English pronouns

This question brings up an important question: Do we want to support the use of made-up non-gender specific pronouns on this site? I.e. zie and zir.

discussion

Grace Note

It's been this one for a while

wax eagle

and strangely gravatar is actually working here...

Flimzy

@ElendiaStarman: Can you vote for my answer, instead of downvoting the question?

El'endia Starman

@Flimzy Done.

Richard

@ElendiaStarman Do you think that zie and zir should be used?

wax eagle

8:22 PM

answered.

El'endia Starman

@Richard No, I don't.

Grace Note

@Richard Hence the original downvote, I imagine

Richard

Yeah, that's what confused me. To me the post was trying to make sure we don't use those. ;)

El'endia Starman

Lol. Well, I switched my vote on the question from down to up and +1'd Flimzy's answer.

Flimzy

How do we flag this to get a mod to keep him from rolling back our corrections?

Grace Note

8:25 PM

@Flimzy Stop rolling back his edits!

Just leave it alone until the dust settles, then we set it to what it decided.

Flimzy

Okay

Well, I haven't rolled anything back :)

or edited it

Richard

@GraceNote Good idea.

wax eagle

@GraceNote can you nuke comments on that q if you aren't already in process?

Grace Note

@waxeagle I'm holding off on it for a bit.

wax eagle

@GraceNote k

a_hardin

8:30 PM

Does that question seem a little broad? It seems like answers would have to be able to cover many governments and churches

El'endia Starman

@a_hardin ...now that you mention it, that question is actually VTC'able because of that.

wax eagle

@a_hardin perhaps he needs to focus on the JW only answer.

Sklivvz

1

Q: What is transubstantiation?

According to Wikipedia: When at his Last Supper, Jesus said: "This is my body", what he held in his hands still had all the appearances of bread: these "accidents" remained unchanged. However, the Roman Catholic Church believes that, when Jesus made that declaration, the underlying reality (t...

catholicism transubstantiation

?

wax eagle

@Sklivvz great question. I actually don't believe in that (my denomination holds that the bread and wine are mere signs rather than an actual miracle occurring each time), so I can't give you a great answer..

a_hardin

@Sklivvz I like that question!

El'endia Starman

8:35 PM

@Sklivvz I've wondered the same thing before...like...when you drink the wine, how come it doesn't taste like blood (if that actually happened)?

wax eagle

@ElendiaStarman "Its a miracle"

El'endia Starman

@waxeagle I always figured the "miracle" part was the transformation...

wax eagle

wishes he understood it better

Sklivvz

The thing is... you cannot believe what you don't understand at all

Richard

@Sklivvz Wait a second... haven't we seen this question before? begins-searching

wax eagle

8:39 PM

@Sklivvz good thing I don't believe it :)

dancek

@Sklivvz so none of us can believe in quantum mechanics? :P

Richard

We havent' seen that question, exactly, but it's similar to: christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/541/…

DTest

@dancek /clap

Sklivvz

well, you can understand it partially or at least fenomenologically

DTest

@richard did you vtc then answer again? :P

Richard

8:41 PM

Hehe. Nope, I didn't VtC or answer. :P

Sklivvz

I think that to believe you must be able to say "I believe that..." followed by something that you actually understand.

;-)

DTest

regarding the church divorce quesiton from TRiG :D

Richard

@DTest Aah. No, I dind't VtC. I think it could be a valid question. The wording is annoying, though. flagged it. ;)

dancek

@Sklivvz so building a sentence starting "I believe that..." and containing "quantum mechanics" is left as an assignment for the reader! :)

Richard

I'm only 18 votes away from a Reversal!

El'endia Starman

8:45 PM

@Richard LOL.

wax eagle

lolz

I need 3 dvs on @Sklivvz's question to get one :)

DTest

haha

wax eagle

its a tough badge to get

it requires a good answer and relies on someone else's misfortune

Caleb

@DTest He may not have but I just did. At first with about half a dozen questions and angles coming out of that it seems that even if the language issue gets fixed it would be too broad, so I VTCed. Then I got to thinking about it and there is a really simple answer because there is a logical fallacy involved.

Richard

9:01 PM

Wow, this is getting interesting.

Flimzy

I don't know how someone so "logical" can think you're calling him a liar

Richard

LOL Well, he's mad. People don't think clearly when they're mad.

Flimzy

Indeed

wax eagle

lets all back off this subject a bit and cool off k?

or at least let trig cool off

Richard

Wow! I just found this (FAQ for SE 2.0 sites). That's useful.

wax eagle

9:11 PM

@Richard wow, thats....comprehensive

a_hardin

@Richard nice

wax eagle

wonder where we fall

I think we are like 3rd/4th from the bottom right now...

(in reference to getting scope narrow enough, but wide enough)

anyways, time to head for home.

El'endia Starman

@Richard Nice!

@waxeagle Seeya! :)

@waxeagle That's pretty good, methinks.

wax eagle

still can't get the link to work. oh well I givez up. going home now

El'endia Starman

lol

Caleb

9:29 PM

@waxeagle I'd say we fall right before the last item (because we cover things outside the world we live in).

El'endia Starman

@Caleb LOL. :)

Flimzy

@Caleb: I agree?

Caleb

@Flimzy That reminds me of this fantastic piece of oratory:

►

[...] we are the most aggressively inarticulate generation to come along since ... you know ... a long time ago. So I implore you, I entreat you, and I challenge you to speak with conviction; to say what you believe in a manner that bespeaks the determination with which you believe it. -- Taylor Mali

El'endia Starman

@Caleb: Hah, I saw that a while ago!

Errr...I mean...

DUDE, I, like, literally saw that, like, a long time ago, ya know?

CiscoIPPhone

9:46 PM

@ElendiaStarman lol

Flimzy

@Caleb: cute

dancek

what!? TRiG's question is now at -8

seriously

I found no rational reason to downvote and thus didn't -- I certainly don't like the question

with all this fuss and such (undeserved?) downvotes etc, no wonder he feels we're stepping on his toes

Caleb

I'm not sure it's reasonable to expect people to be rational. Especially when it comes to voting.

Richard

@dancek On one had, I agree. We are stepping on his toes. However, when we respectfully ask that he correct his wording and he comes out swinging and attempting what would escalate into an edit war, it's hard not to step on his toes.

On the other hand, I think this is a very insignificant issue to be arguing about. That's why I'm confused at his arguing about it. He admits its a small issue. Then why not conform to the community?

My rationality for downvoting comes directly from here

Caleb

@dancek I agree that the downvote craze is sort of a knee-jerk response. The OP could have avoided it by letting people help instead of fighting them.

Richard

9:58 PM

if a question has problems that don't necessarily require it to be closed or removed, but nevertheless hurt its clarity or usefulness, then feel free to down-vote it

@Caleb Agreed. We were trying to help. I'm not at all against non-native speakers. But if you use improper English and then get mad when I edit it...

It's just confusing to me.

Transcript for