« first day (256 days earlier)      last day (4664 days later) » 

Kit
4:02 PM
I should take this opportunity to mention that I'm not an expert. I studied visual cognition in macaques and Parkinson's patients.
 
@Kit I do not know the former, but I still trust your word anyway. You had to do some general studying before you did a focus, after all, neh?
 
Monkeys? Impressive!
I like monkeys.
 
Kit
@GraceNote Yes, indeedy. I have quite a lot of background in neurobiology and psychology both.
@Cerberus Yeah. Monkeys. You wouldn't like them so much if you had to work with them, but they are much better to work with than mice and rats.
 
@MrDisappointment this isn't even a busy room ;) You should see some of the others I know
 
@Kit Or men.
 
Kit
4:09 PM
@jcolebrand What's your neuro background?
 
Who said this room was busy?
 
Kit
@Cerberus Men are miles better to work with than either monkeys or women.
 
@GraceNote I have experienced this before ...
@Kit only that of having psycho females in my life, and being an avid reader, and knowing a helluva lot more about stuff than I should have knowledge of. This can make for a disconcerting life at times ;)
 
@Kit Really? Well... I suppose it depends on what you're doing to them.
 
@jcolebrand Well, you did research, didn't you? Or did I misread you at one point?
 
4:11 PM
@GraceNote You may have misread me then. I have only done armchair research, at best.
 
Kit
@Cerberus 'Struth. Just generally. Women are all crazy.
 
(Also I didn't know about the first part of that background)
@jcolebrand Hm. Your interest at that earlier point seemed to convey it, but I can accept that I attached deeper meaning to simpler circumstances.
 
However, experience often trumps research, in that I've had people who have had true psychotic issues who have had hallucinations both chemically derived and natural.
 
Who usually prunes our tags? @JSBangs? are like, all used at once on bunches of questions like this. So many tags for such little words.
 
@aedia your mods, or the dev team.
 
4:13 PM
@aedia JSBangs was driven away with Kosmonaut.
Both are dearly missed.
 
Kit
@Cerberus He's back today.
 
He just stopped back though.
 
Really!
That is good.
 
Kit
And @aedia, he does do a lot of tag work.
 
I was hoping he might stay.
 
4:14 PM
@Cerberus JSB... oh, I'm not going to say it if it's been done twice
 
But I don't expect him to pick up his work again... do you?
 
Kit
@Cerberus He said he was just taking a break from EL&U for a while.
@Cerberus Dunno.
 
@Kit I thought he was the one who was an experienced retagger.
 
@Kit Yeah that's what I thought.
@aedia He was our tag man.
 
Having seen him on other sites, he does seem the tagging type
 
Kit
4:15 PM
@aedia This is what I'm saying.
 
Noöne else could find the motivation.
But he cared about order.
Incidentally, why has everyone been speaking English for the past hour?
This isn't the incomprehensible room for nothing!
Robusto will do something about that.
 
@Cerberus Yo no sé.
 
Muchos gracias.
Pero no hablo Espagnol.
 
Kit
Parceque il y a longtemps que je parlais francais, et je ne sais pas ou my ASCII chart is.
 
Ah, très bien!
 
Kit
4:19 PM
And I will not speak French at work et ni anywhere else non plus.
 
Mais pourquoi pas?
 
Kit
(which is the bastardization of a very sad poem about Acadians.)
 
@Cerberus Y yo no hablo holandés, pero he aprendido un poquito :)
 
Ton Français est plus fort que le mien.
@Kit Quoi? What is that about?
 
Kit
@Cerberus Vraiment? Peut-etre parceque j'habite l'etat ou il y a beaucoup de francophones.
 
4:21 PM
@aedia Und es freute mich sehr, auf Holländisch gegrüßt zu werden!
 
Kit
@Cerberus Lemme see if I can find it.
 
0
Q: What is an expert?

HauserThis article made me think of what im actually supposed to think of an expert for ... When can/should i introduce somebody as an expert? Definitions in dictionaries dont show much accordance to me. Professional experience, academic grades, should you use it only for academics at all? Your answe...

 
@Kit Still good... we have a lot of Frencies here as well.
 
There's no way to answer this definitively.
 
Kit
说中文吗?
 
4:25 PM
@Robusto Alot of credibility, to the rescue!
 
Kit
@Cerberus I can't find it online, and I'm not sure if I have it anywhere at home. And I don't remember the title either.
 
@Robusto Unfit, but hard to pick a close reason. Just not interesting...
 
Kit
My brother might remember; he was the one who gave it to me.
 
OK...
 
Kit
@Cerberus Not constructive?
 
4:26 PM
Hmm... he specifically asks for objective criteria... I dunno.
 
It seems some parts too broad, some parts not quite on-topic.
 
@Cerberus Und jetzt hatte ich zu betrügen und die Verwendung von Google, das zu sagen. Ich hoffe, es ist Worten.
 
From the latter perspective, certainly the definition of an expert is a matter of the English language, but when you extend past that towards what exactly the measure of criteria is, that seems a bit past that point. From my viewpoint, at least.
 
@aedia Haha, I see anglicisms...
 
Drat! Where are all the ELU Russians?
 
4:40 PM
-4
Q: Synonyms for the word "SPAM" as defined by Monty Python sketch?

hhhYoutube "Monty Python Spam" if you have no historical understanding of the issue. Spam means something that does not help communication, not just "spam emails". Now instead of getting into fights of using it too often, I want to know synonyms for it. For some reason, this word is not well underst...

You are all DISCRIMINATING against MONTY PYTHON
 
Now I need them they... aha!
 
Oh hohum, hi @simchona
 
g'morning ^^
 
Morning!
 
Kit
@simchona What? Don't be ridiculous!
We're discriminating against a user that asks crappy questions because they are too young to know that Spam was canned meat until recently.
And yet has the temerity to say "Youtube "Monty Python Spam" if you have no historical understanding of the issue."
 
4:43 PM
@Kit psst I think simchona is joking
 
Temerity... after I look that up, I have to see about incorporating that into my vocabulary.
 
Kit
That question ought to be deleted.
 
@aedia: Yup. I forgot to add my sarcasm
@Kit His other questions are all at negative votes too
 
@aedia Bloody Peasant!
 
Kit
4:49 PM
@simchona All of them?
 
@Kit All but one maybe?
 
@Kit All of the visible ones (minus one)
 
Kit
@simchona One out of five ain't bad.
 
One is at +4, the other four are at -3 to -5
 
Hm...
 
4:51 PM
Buwaha, which browser do you think scores worst in a Javascript test, by far?
Sorry, that wasn't nice.
Opera: 259 ms.
FF: 270 ms.
Chrome: 300 ms.
Is this an anomaly?
 
another of hhh's questions just got closed
 
Kit
@Cer I don't know what you are talking about.
@simchona I've never seen a user with negative rep before.
And pretty much all within a day.
 
Well, off to work
 
@Kit Chrome is always said to be the fastest browser around, and yet it performs worst in this Javascript speed test.
 
@Kit Stops at 1, can't go below 1
 
Kit
4:56 PM
@GraceNote Sorry. Context-less. I mean in rep change when you look in the user bin.
 
@Kit Ooh, there. Aye, that is possible.
It's worse seeing it on the month or quarterly ones.
 
Kit
@Cerberus Oh, I see.
 
5:19 PM
0
Q: What is a word for the relationship between "waning" and "un-waning"?

drm65In a recent question, an antonym for waning was requested. Waxing was naturally suggested, but the OP declined the word because he was actually looking for a word meaning un-waning, and thought that "antonym" was the word to describe his request. The difference is: waxing means getting stronger...

Do any of you have input here?
Any of you gurus?
 
Kit
What kind of input?
@waiwai933 I think the fish question is a dupe, and not exactly a gen ref.
Both plurals are acceptable and there is a question somewhere that explains which is appropriate when.
 
Ooh, now I understand what that question is asking.
 
aw, you guys were saying such nice things about me earlier
 
@Kit en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fish#Noun <-- Explained clearly; how is that not gen. ref?
 
@aedia anyway, i think there's a case to be made for all three tags
 
5:25 PM
@Kit I remember that question too.
I couldn't find it though
 
Kit
@waiwai933 I understand that, but I think there was a question that explained the differences as well. (Which also explained why it wasn't just gen ref)
 
@aedia the definite article and the indefinite article are different things
 
@Kit Words, numbers, fire, comments, answers, whatever you feel like doing...
 
of course, having those and also having is potentially redundant
 
@JSBangs But here's the catch - is there an important enough distinction to warrant separate tags for them?
In the scope of how the site can grow, is there value in keeping the questions about definite articles and indefinite articles separate on the tag level? Or is it more than sufficient to contain both of them within a singular articles tag?
 
Kit
5:27 PM
@drm65 I am tempted to close for peeving. ;-)
 
@GraceNote point taken. and since there are only three articles in english, you might as well just tag them , and
or [tag:a(n)] and
 
@Kit Could I get an explanation of what "peeving" is?
 
@Kit Well, if you can find it, you can link it. Google, however, can't seem to find it.
 
maybe?
 
@Kit I have no motive for peeving - I got 4 upvotes and an accept.
 
Kit
5:29 PM
@waiwai933 I think your comment is nice, and will suffice. I am already tired of looking.
 
@GraceNote well, i'll put it up to the community
 
Kit
@drm65 Hence the wink. But a wink's as good as a nod to a blind man. ☺
 
^ vote here if you think they should be merged
@Kit, you betweened me
 
Kit
@JSBangs Sorry!
@GraceNote Complaining about pet peeves, with use extended into just plain bitchery and ranting.
At least as far as I understand the term.
 
@Kit Ah, gotcha.
 
5:31 PM
on further thought, i think that we should definitely merge with . so i encourage people to vote for the synonyms above
 
Kit
@drm65 Oh, right. I was one of those upvotes.
 
this after i looked at the questions for , and over half of them are duplicates of a basic a/an question. there don't seem to be enough questions to support its own tag, which means it should go away, which probably means that should also go away
 
Huhwhamorecoffee?
 
Alas, I cannot vote
 
@GraceNote Neither can I
 
5:35 PM
hi, @simoncha. your chat avatar is the only one that might, MIGHT be cuter than @Kit's
 
@JSBangs Thank you ^^
I do like fennec foxes, though...
 
Hi @JSB! I can't vote for tag synonyms either quite yet :(
 
@JSBangs: Oh, hey, since you are back and all I am more than willing to help you in any of your cleanup/retagging projects.
Just ping me and let me know :)
 
Kit
@JSBangs I'm not cute. I'm ferocious! yip!
 
@MrHen you can start by voting here: english.stackexchange.com/tags/articles/synonyms
 
5:37 PM
@JSBangs I'll just take the "cute" description then
 
@Kit aw, that's adorable
 
I can vote! Which way, hmmm....
UP for both.
 
@drm65 Howdy! I understand I may have disappointed you earlier?
 
@JSBangs Mmk. How does this work? If I vote up for definite-article, does that mean I want to see definite-article disappear?
 
Kit
I don't understand what I'm supposed to do.
 
5:38 PM
@MrHen it means that you think that should become a synonym of
 
Kit
Thanks.
 
which means that definite-article effectively disappears, since everything tagged with that gets swept together with
 
Got it. It looks like I don't have the required votes on the relevant tags though :P
 
Kit
How can I not be qualified to vote on these tags?
Ridiculous!
 
@MrDisappointment Indeed
@Kit Yes. It is.
 
5:41 PM
@drm65 Well, I didn't intend to provoke answer deletion; I simply wished to share a view in order to give a wider perspective to any readers.
 
Kit
Weird! I haven't a single answer tagged with or its variants.
Hang on, I'll retag something, vote, and then un-tag it.
 
@MrDisappointment Well, if you're right, my answer's not worth putting up.
@Kit :-$
 
@Kit i don't think that'll work
unfortunately
 
Kit
Rats.
 
@JSBangs How do you know?
 
Kit
5:44 PM
And I was all gungho about breaking the rules so obviously and everything.
^ sardonic
 
@drm65 If I am right, then perhaps; but if you have confidence in your input then let the community decide that .
As it happens, I may not always make myself perfectly clear, but I am, in fact, always absolutely right.
2
 
@drm65 you have to have ~50 rep IIRC, and in any case tag-specific rep isn't recalc'd that often
 
@JSBangs In most scenarios it is only calculated once a day, in fact
 
3
Q: Fish fish fish ...

picakhuI have seen that buffalo buffalo... has been posted here before. However some sites claim also that the sentence Fish fish fish fish fish fish fish. makes sense. Can someone confirm and explain?

i hate this question. can we please come up with a pretext to kill it?
 
Wasn't there just a discussion about that being either gen ref or a dupe?
 
5:49 PM
No, that was a different fish question.
 
@JSBangs I missed you so much.
 
Oh. Too many fish.
 
It's a great example of a highly contrived question. It doesn't belong.
 
@aedia man, i should leave more often. when i come back there's just so much love
 
Kit
@Jasper Hello!
 
5:51 PM
@JSBangs There are numerous proverbs about how no one understands the value of something until it is truly lost.
 
Kit
@JSBangs I love you too!
 
kisses for everybody!
 
Kit
Hooray!
wags tail
 
We closed this one as a dupe:
0
Q: Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo

sugar - Sagar Kothari Possible Duplicate: Awkward sounding but grammatically correct sentences? Why is the following statement valid, and how can I break it down so that it is easier to understand? Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo

 
user19161
@Kit Hello! I see JSBangs is back.
 
5:52 PM
And so the cycle continues...
 
Kit
Do fennecs wag their tails?
 
Just close'em all as useless.
 
@JSBangs I voted it off-topic
 
@Kit It looks like it:
0:40 wagging tail eating uh, a goldfish. May not want to watch if you care about goldfish.
 
Kit
I find it more upsetting that these idiots are keeping fennecs in their apartment like pets.
The clip also provides a good sample of my ferocious yipping!
 
5:58 PM
@Kit: And the guy keeps holding the fish in his hand, and yelling when they bite him. Duh, dumb dude in video.
 

« first day (256 days earlier)      last day (4664 days later) »