« first day (30 days earlier)      last day (5079 days later) » 

00:32
@Borror0 That's a good point, I've just enjoy popping particular conspiracy theories for personal reasons.
Plus if a conspiracy theory question is on-topic and of decent quality, then it is only going to advance the interest of the site here.
 
10 hours later…
10:34
0
Q: Copyrighted images

fredleyWhat is procedure for copyrighted images? e.g. This one. Is it ok to reproduce copyrighted material in an answer, or should it just be linked to?

11:31
0
Q: Is logic enough?

Borror0Is offering a reference absolutely necessary, or is a logical answer enough?

 
3 hours later…
14:58
I see @MarkRogers has brought out the big guns, so to speak :)
@JasonPlank Huh? Do you mean conspiracies?
@Borror0 Yeah
Probably the two most popular ones in the states, imo
Talking about big guns, I think today is gonna be expensive
So many answers to downvote =/
Heh
I'd better start answering some more, otherwise I risk falling below the editing privilege threshold
On the same question, I have had to convert two answers to comments, and ask another to back up his one line and a half answer.
@JasonPlank Please do that. Your answers are good. Usually a good answer on a question prevent the apparition of bad answers. It'll make my job easier.
15:48
I'm not sure if the astronomy tag is appropriate for this question. Thoughts?
Okay, apparently markdown doesn't handle links in chat like it does in posts. Oh well.
Ya. Chat's markdown is more limited
@JasonPlank I doubt it is as well. I would go with physics, or something
@Borror0 Yeah, I'm researching the question to answer it, so I might retag it when I have a better idea.
That works!
That question could gain from a non-delete worthy answer...
when/if, really... having a tough time finding anything thus far
@Borror0 true
Can you see deleted answers yet? It has three.
15:56
@Borror0 negative
Must be at 2k
I assumed it comes with moderator tools (which I see now is indeed 2k)
Well, it has three deleted answers and might have a fourth at this pace
16:07
Oddly enough, the retag link is not present among edit/close/link/flag
When you gain edit rights, the retag button becomes redundant
It does appear to the left of the tags, if your mouse is above the tags
So, there's always that
Oh, so if I edit it but don't change the post content, it counts as a retag?
aye
Quicker to put your mouse over the tags though.
When I do that, I get a dropdown showing tag wiki info
Check to the right of tags
It'll be written "edit tags"
"Did I say 10 million times more than usual? Oops. I meant four times."
16:15
@Borror0 Nothing comes up when I hover to the right
@Borror0 That must be a 10k or mod feature
@Fabian Checked on MSO. You're right.
0
Q: How to improve this question?

Alaukikis there a way this question (http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1048/is-communism-bad) can be improved ?

16:45
I suggested an edit to the medicine wiki, does anyone have any objections?
If I can view it, I have no idea how
"There is no tag wiki for this tag … yet! ..."
Huh, maybe it's a caching issue, that's lame.
Oh, the priv to approve tag wiki edits comes at 1.5k
IIRC, once you have the priv to edit posts w/o suggestion, you can approve suggested edits, but not view the list of suggested edits, so I thought that was why for a minute
17:03
Wiki-edits are overly confusing sometimes.
@MarkRogers Indeed
17:24
Wow... as if I needed more reasons to like stack exchange, this serves as yet another.
I hope you posted that as a comment to the question
I didn't, I'm not sure it would be relevant really
humorous, but probably just noise
Brings you closer to pundit badge!
I see we have what looks to be a good answer to that question now
17:39
0
Q: Is the belief in aliens, ghosts, unicorns dangerous?

JoeBertrand Russell once wrote that ...individual actions are based upon the beliefs of the person acting, and if the beliefs are unsupported by evidence, then such beliefs can lead to destructive actions. Is there a moral or ethical obligation for scientific skeptics to defend (if not valori...

17:53
@MarkRogers I've accepted one and refused another (it was a list of alt-medicines)
@Borror0 Off-topic? It's philosophy
I was going to rant about that question, but the telephone rang right after I posted that
@Sklivvz Yeah, I know. The way Atwood described tag wikis, is that the information should be centered on the topic of the site, rather than the definition of the word. I supplied the list of supposed psuedoscientific medical claims, because that was very relevant information to the site.
on wikipedia anyway.
But I guess some of those claims might be actually true, so I can see how you would object. I just listed them because they are psuedosciences to look out for.
18:20
I added a few more wiki edits, this time I just supplied the definition, feel free to reject or accept, I promise I won't bite anyone's head off.
@MarkRogers My point was that we also have an alt-medicine tag where that information would be more relevant :-)
To the American users: is there a term for a decent but not great hit in baseball?
I'm comparing something great to an home run; I'd like the equivalent term for "decent, but not groundbreaking" if it exists, to complete my analogy.
doh, 3rd base?
@Sklivvz well, only some of those where "classic" alt-medicine, the list was slightly more encompassing. But I see your point.
@MarkRogers Besides that, the review page is broken - it showed both changes against the empty tag wiki, but I would have expected to see the second change against the first, once I accepted it. So it was quite hard to see the final result.
18:27
Apparently, it's called a "single" or a "hit" the more you know
@Sklivvz Gotcha, I didn't mean to be rude, I wasted too much time formatting that list. I knew it was probably going to get rejected.
I know, and that's exactly why I wanted to give you a lengthy explanation :-)
cool, thx.
18:50
@Borror0 Shame for assuming American users know sportsball terms :P
American users are more likely to know about baseball than European users
@Borror0 Yeah, incidentally, I am highly indifferent to sports, but knew the term regardless.
I've posted an easy question...
0
Q: Does the "sugar high" exist at all?

SklivvzI've heard numerous times that eating a high quantity of sugar will give you a "sugar high" or "sugar buzz" The high one gets after consuming large amounts of sugar. Also called a "sugar rush." Sugar highs cause twitchiness, spasms, and hyper excitability. Sugar highs do not last very long, a...

19:37
0
Q: Remove number of links restriction for new users

FabianNew users with less than 10 reputation can only add one link per post. As we want to encourage users to cite their claims, this restriction can be counterproductive sometimes. It would be nice if that part of the new user restrictions could be removed on Skeptics.

19:53
MikePMoffatt: Has anyone, either media or politician, discussed any ideas to eliminate the deficit? #elxn41
Borror0: @MikePMoffatt Flaherty implied that staring at it for long enough would make it go away.
MikePMoffatt: @Borror0 Hey, don't knock it. I got rid of a girlfriend that way.
Voodoo economics, Canadian style

« first day (30 days earlier)      last day (5079 days later) »