« first day (224 days earlier)      last day (274 days later) » 

12:00 AM
I believe that there should be a system employing field experts, paid experts most likely.
..who would wean out the chaff.
Not to mention different theoretical frameworks and terminology are mixed more or less at random.
Often very technical terms are used – or misused.
It's very difficult to create high quality resources.
I think in many fields the experts don't really get paid much for doing their expertly things.
The few professional linguists who edit ling articles on Wikipedia do it for free
I don't think voting on ELL is all that bad
It frustrates me on occasion but overall it usually works okay
12:09 AM
@snailboat Yes, voting on ELL is good. But as Wikipedia started to degenerate, so StackExchance could.
"What's got for eyes and can't see?" - "Mississippi".
I got the thing about "i"s
But why "can't see"..
12:25 AM
A nice expression: "It just doesn't follow" (watching the movie "Mississippi Burning"). In Russian, we would say "Что-то ничего не клеится" (Nothing seems to stick together)
The full sentence seems to be "That just doesn't follow logically".
1:03 AM
Word of the morning: pointy-head
"The insult pointy-head for one deemed overly intellectual, attested by 1971, was popularized, if not coined, by U.S. politician George Wallace in his 1972 presidential run."
"Nothing like a barber shop for jawing your socks off!" - probably a typo of "showing your socks off". I found nothing for "jaw off" except some horrible Syrian War footage.
6 hours later…
7:06 AM
@MaulikV this is closed as off-topic ; I didn't understand exactly the policy. Can you help me with my question? Can it be improved or off-topic?
5 hours later…
12:11 PM
@Pandya Not sure if he'll respond, but it's meta effect and your question got on hold due to the attention it got in meta.
Q: Does this answer deserve "five" downvotes?

RathonyI don't usually mind my answer being downvoted because I know the voting system here doesn't work. I saw two identical answers, one of which received 31 upvotes and the other received 9 upvotes. The funny thing was the other answer received 3 downvotes. I believe you would understand why the voti...

Though I don't believe it's GR and VTR'd.
2 hours later…
2:04 PM
Hello guys! Maybe my question will be shunned, but, anyway, here's the question: :D
Proofreading questions like this
http://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/74279/what-was-the-problem-with-the-egyptian-calendar should really be closed?
Never mind, the question has been altered.
4 hours later…
5:57 PM
Q: This kind of edition should be discouraged

RathonyI have just found one edition that the editor put the context on behalf of the OP and there was a reopen vote cast in favor of this question. I don't think it is a good idea or practice/policy to allow this kind of edition. The OP should edit it himself when his question is closed if he really ...

3 hours later…
8:38 PM
@Pandya We use 'scope' as our tag for discussing that sort of thing on Meta.Japanese, too.
9:05 PM
@DamkerngT. Okay, I went back to the comment discussion now that my head's a little clearer and tried to rewrite my comments a little more accurately.
Let's see if we can't sort out the confusion in these comments. There's some good discussion of this in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (p.79). Here are three examples: ① It was broken deliberately, out of spite. [past participle form of verb] ② It didn't look broken to me. [past-participial adjective] ③ It was broken. [ambiguous] They write: "The verb broken in ① denotes an event, while the adjective broken in ② denotes a state – and the ambiguity of ③ lies precisely in the fact that it can be interpreted in either of these ways. — snailboat 3 mins ago
How does this apply to the question? Well, let me try to rewrite my first comment (now deleted) a bit more accurately. Offended is not an adjective in past tense form. Adjectives don't inflect for tense in English like they do in some other languages. Instead, it's an adjective derived from a verb form, specifically the past participial form of offend (which happens to look the same as the past tense form because offend is a regular verb). — snailboat 47 secs ago
How's that look?
9:16 PM
@snailboat Purty sweet.
@StoneyB I ask because last time I posted comments on this question, they weren't quite right, so I thought it'd be good to get another set of eyes on whatever I wrote :-)
@snailboat +10000

« first day (224 days earlier)      last day (274 days later) »