« first day (2112 days earlier)      last day (2812 days later) » 

9:00 PM
Hmm, I got pinged. Just a moment.
 
Did you lose the room?
 
9:24 PM
OK. So @MετάEd, you're high enough rep that you saw chat flags even before you were a mod, right?
 
@KitZ.Fox Yes. That's nothing new.
 
@MετάEd OK. There's another kind of chat flag that is mod only.
I'll demonstrate. Are you ready?
 
Yes.
 
See it?
 
I do.
 
9:28 PM
OK. Handle it.
Good. You picked "this is noise"?
 
I handled it dismissively.
 
OK. You will see those for all SE chat rooms.
If you aren't comfortable handling it, you can just close it by x-ing out of it.
 
Right, and that leaves the flag up.
 
For chat users, you also have the kick-mute option.
You can't kick-mute a moderator.
Room owners have the same privilege.
 
9:31 PM
@Tonepoet I'm afraid.
 
Well. So kick-mute is about as useful as ... it's not useful, unless you want to make people angry.
It's better to do a chat suspension for 30 minutes.
 
Yeah, I think people who are muted just try to bypass it by leaving comment pings....
Cough...
 
Well, and kick-mute is only for a minute or something.
So if you go to Tonepoet's chat profile, you will see a Moderation tools button at the bottom.
 
@KitZ.Fox So it's like poking the bear. Doesn't give enough tme to cool off.
 
@MετάEd Right.
 
9:34 PM
@KitZ.Fox Got it.
 
Most chat suspensions are issued automatically from flags. Your flags are immediately binding. If a user has posted a message that is clearly flag-worthy, then flag it and they will be suspended for 30 minutes.
Successive flags increase the suspension time.
 
I am pleased to see that I can flag my own posts.
So when I know I need a time-out ...
 
If the user is worked up and needs to cool off and you think it's a good idea to suspend them but don't have a particular trigger to point at, then you can use moderation tools to manually suspend.
You can't suspend moderators from chat.
Not even yourself.
Shog can do it because he's magic.
 
@KitZ.Fox So I simply at-at Shog and tell him I need a time-out.
makes notes
 
The other particularly useful thing in the mod tools is in the tiny links at the top -- all flags. It shows every flag on a user's posts and whether they were validated or not.
I think tchrist probably has a couple on his profile.
 
9:41 PM
Ooh, the ELU main chatroom has turned into the ELU mod room!
 
@KitZ.Fox Your flags are entertaining.
 
Pretty funny, huh?
What? I don't have any flags!
 
Do you need me to flag something?
 
Oh right. Those flags.
@Tonepoet No, I think we're good. Thanks.
 
It seems strange that a moderators could run out of flags come to think of it.
 
9:43 PM
I have no flags? That's gotta be a bug.
 
Yeah, I thought that was weird. But you've got flags on the main site, so maybe just never in chat?
 
@KitZ.Fox Strange. I'd have expected at least one for language.
 
But I could swear that one about picking a fight was actually flagged.
@MετάEd Oh! I forgot to tell you that the other nice perk is infinite edit time.
And you can edit everyone's messages, even moderators.
 
damn, I was about to edit that in :D
 
I saw that.
 
9:46 PM
If you click on the left side, you'll see "history". You can also now do this with deleted posts.
SFF mods are cooler than ELU mods!
coughs Sorry @Rand.
 
splutters with indignation
 
You can move messages between rooms as well, but I don't want to totally overwhelm you.
 
When did you ever have to do that?
 
@MετάEd Move messages or overwhelm you?
 
@KitZ.Fox Revenge is sweet ;-)
 
9:50 PM
Curse you @Randal'Thor!
 
@KitZ.Fox Move messages.
 
We've done it before for things like elections -- where there was conversation that probably should have been in the main chat that was in the election room and vice versa.
 
Gotcha.
 
We also do it to remove large sections of messages that would be deleted, in cases where there has been a blowout.
At some point, we'll brief you on the extent of chat drama and ensuing policies.
But not tonight.
The general policy for extreme drama is to freeze the room and expunge the conversation.
Problem for us now is that so many of us are mods that freezing the room won't make so much difference.
So we just have to promise to try to be nice.
OK. I have to go boating with my husband now.
Congratulations and welcome.
 
'Tis a far, far better thing to go boating.
Thank you.
 
9:56 PM
I expect the queue to be cleared by tomorrow.
;)
 
It's cleared except for the two Y-O's.
 
whut
 
And not by me.
 
As promised, I've started flagging comments now that the election's over :-)
 
omg. Also you can purge comment chains now.
 
9:57 PM
I'm looking at the meta queue.
 
@MετάEd Not that queue.
The bigger one. In blue.
 
Do I want to tiptoe quietly around that? Let sleeping tigers lie?
I was afraid that's what you meant.
 
Just go delete all the comment chains.
It's good practice. And a nice commentgate will ease you in to the whole "mod abuse" process.
Or wait until tomorrow.
Have fun! Don't break anything!
Bai!
Oh. And unpin that stuff, will you? -->
 
(if you haven't unpinned stuff before: click the little black arrow at the end of the post on the star-board, and you should see a link "unpin this item")
 
@KitZ.Fox delete all my answer-comment. I won't notice anyway.
@Randal'Thor OMG nooooooo! The queue has almost got down to 0!
wait, that's the review queue I see.
I don't see the mod queue, so I have no feelings whatsoever about it.
 
10:10 PM
@Mitch You're not blue - you can't see the mod queue :-)
 
But I can JINX!!!
 
@Mitch Yeah, it's amazing. I think this is the first day I've seen less than 20 items in the Close Votes review queue.
 
I don't know what happened to the review queue while I was gone. It's amazing.
 
@MετάEd maybe it was you? Not being around that is.
You should go away more often
 
Maybe all the people who ask bad questions have somehow been chased out.
@MετάEd Let me know if I'm overwhelming you with these comment flags :-)
ELUers do like to chat.
 
10:15 PM
@Randal'Thor what's the point of not chatting. You're just there.
And now I must turn myself into just thereness.
 
@Randal'Thor It's true. We are a gregarious bunch.
 
@MετάEd I should hang out here more often :-)
Though my own main chatroom is also one of the most active on SE.
 
@Randal'Thor The nice thing about EL&U chat is that we chat in English so we're always on topic.
 
"in English" =/= "about English" though.
 
@MετάEd It all starts getting off-topic when @Mitch chats
Oh, a blue metaed is gonna get some getting used to
 
10:25 PM
@Cerberus Well, here's the thing. I don't get why neuter in Latin should translate to masculine in Spanish.
 
@Randal'Thor yes, the use-mention distinction comes in handy a lot here also.
 
@DEAD He should have some white and red bits too.
 
@MετάEd Not according to certain mods.
 
@MετάEd Nicht immer
@Robusto it's gotta go somewhere
 
@Mitch Summat's gotta give?
 
10:29 PM
@Robusto I loved that movie!
@MετάEd Quotes! Why can't people use "quotes properly?
 
@Mitch stifles himself
 
@Mitch I don't think you've quite filled your quote quota there.
And, yes, I know it's intentional.
 
... in a sentence" properly in a sentence?
 
Ah. It was the delayed reveal. I should have known.
Staple of knock-knock jokes everywhere.
 
@Robusto Knock knock!
 
10:34 PM
Who dere?
 
Interrupti.. MOOOOOO!
 
@Robusto Gerald the interrupting cow.
 
Lessee ... is it ... Gerald the interrup--
 
MOOO!
Dammit @Mitch :-P
 
La vache qui rit!
 
10:35 PM
all the 7 year olds laugh uproariously
all the 8 year olds roll their eyes
@Robusto Best cheese label ever.
 
A joke which can only be told here by chat mods.
 
Worst cheese inside the best cheese label ever...ever
 
@Mitch :)
 
Mar 31 '11 at 14:22, by Robusto
Eeuuwwww! Let's not say things we can't take back.
 
> Daily comment flag limit reached; please try again in 1 hour.
Anyway, hi @Robusto! Haven't seen you here before - I thought you'd left the site or something months back.
 
10:41 PM
Hi everyone. I was having a discussion over on another site... So, here's a question.
Is the sentence:
> I wasn't suggesting that you didn't read review contents.
a double negative?
 
@FaheemMitha Yes, but a grammatically correct one.
 
@Randal'Thor I used to be a regular here. No longer. But yeah, I never saw you neither, nohow.
 
@Randal'Thor Thanks. Is the qualification necessary? :-)
Hi @Robusto. Visiting? There are less of you folks here than used to be.
 
@FaheemMitha Well, it ain't like the "not nobody, not nohow" type of double negative.
 
@Randal'Thor I'd hope not.
 
10:43 PM
> Double negatives ain't never acceptable.
> Remember to not split infinitives.
 
@FaheemMitha Well, la zorra has made chat safe and boring, like an unimaginative mommy should. Enjoy!
 
> Overstatement is the worst thing ever.
 
Could I get a second on it being a double negative? Just to satisfy the doubters?
@Robusto?
@Robusto Who?
 
> Litotes is not a bad conversational strategy.
 
@Robusto I use them a lot. I think I read too many English novels when growing up. The British like 'em.
 
10:45 PM
@FaheemMitha ¿Quién es la zorra?
 
> I won't say paraleipsis is bad.
 
@Robusto Uh, you made me break out google translate.
And yes.
 
> Metanoia is the most — well, I won't say it's the most, but it's certainly among the most over-used gimmicks in English.
 
@Robusto So, it's a double negative?
@Robusto That's two words I don't know the meaning of. I just read the WP article for litotes 5 minutes ago, or that would be 3.
 
No, no, no, it's a negative complement. Not a negative compliment.
 
10:47 PM
@Robusto So it's not a double negative? It seems to fit the WP definition.
 
Nah. Read the passage again.
 
@Robusto The intellectual pressure of this conversation is becoming too much for me.
 
And here I thought you wanted to grow up to be somebody ...
 
@Robusto Nope. It's too late for that.
 
My bad.
 
10:52 PM
There's always the Latin room. Cerb is a mod there, so anything goes.
 
@Randal'Thor wha?? That is not a double negative.
You have two separate clauses
Negation words on two separate verbs
@KitZ.Fox Anything
 
I wouldn't say it's not a double negative
 
@Mitch "I wasn't suggesting that you didn't read ..." Looks like a double negative to me, but I guess I'll defer to you expert linguists.
 
@MattE.Эллен nice.
 
@Mitch anything
 
10:54 PM
@MattE.Эллен So you agree with me? :-D
@KitZ.Fox sceptical face
 
@Randal'Thor it's certainly complex with multiple negations, but it's not a double negative
 
@Randal'Thor seriously. Try it.
Oh. Well except Greek-Latin hybrids.
 
@KitZ.Fox And no prizes for guessing who the chattiest mod is in that room.
@KitZ.Fox You mean I could get my non-mod sock to go in there and tell Cerb to f*** off, and use all the derogatory terms I can think of, and nothing would happen to it? Still sceptical, sorry.
 
@KitZ.Fox I didn't think a person could have bad breath in chat, but congratulations for enlightening me.
And with that, I'm outta here!
 
@Randal'Thor you could try. It would be interesting.
 
11:05 PM
@KitZ.Fox Nah, I'm not going to use a sock to violate Be Nice. I value my diamond too much for that ;-)
I'm sure you know some trolls you could send over there though.
 
Just tried. Don't think it worked though.
 
@Mitch Point me to the precise rules for a double negative, please. If possible. Do you have a link?
@MattE.Эллен Way to cloud the issue.
 
11:23 PM
@FaheemMitha Wikipedia is inconsistent
 
@Mitch I don't follow. Why is WP relevant?
 
Also factually wrong in places both according to itself and to reality
 
Oh, I see I mentioned WP earlier.
@Mitch Well, maybe. I'd still like a link, if you happen to have one.
 
@FaheemMitha if you find it irrelevant then good. But they do give a definition
 
@Mitch For "double negative". Yes, they sort of do. At the beginning.
 
11:26 PM
@FaheemMitha The problem is that "double negative" is a misleading name. People use it when they really mean "negative concord."
 
The WP article starts with:
> A double negative is a grammatical construction occurring when two forms of negation are used in the same sentence.
Is that wrong?
 
WP is a mess
 
Negative concord can involve even more than two negative elements: "I ain't never seen nothing there."
 
@FaheemMitha 'sentence' is wrong
Clause is intended
 
@sumelic I definitely don't have negative concord in mind when I use the term "double negative".
Negative concord is grammatically dubious at best.
@Mitch I see.
 
11:28 PM
@FaheemMitha In that case, you will confuse people by using the term, because negative concord is what many people have in mind when they hear the term "double negative."
 
@FaheemMitha Uh, what? No linguist would dispute that many languages use negative concord!
 
Do you happen to have a source, or should I go digging?
 
Connect two sentences with negation to make a new sentence. Do you think you should use 'double negation' to describe that?
 
@curiousdannii Sure, they do. But is it grammatically sensible?
@Mitch Hmm. Good point.
 
@FaheemMitha Absolutely.
It's just a form of agreement.
 
11:30 PM
@Mitch But my sentence was one clause, wasn't it?
 
@FaheemMitha As grammatically sensible as using a singular verb after "more than one person."
 
@curiousdannii Ok. Grammatically correct example, please?
 
@FaheemMitha Negative concord is not grammatically correct in standard English.
But not all sentences with two negatives in them are examples of negative concord.
 
@sumelic I wasn't suggesting that was the case.
 
@FaheemMitha All the examples on the Wikipedia page
 
11:32 PM
So, to get back to the point. Can anyone point me to an article which defines a double negative.
 
@MετάEd Elections happened. That's why.
 
@curiousdannii Which page is that?
 
@sumelic But it is correct in many major varieties of English, such as African American Vernacular English
A double negative is a grammatical construction occurring when two forms of negation are used in the same sentence. Multiple negation is the more general term referring to the occurrence of more than one negative in a clause. In some languages, double negatives cancel one another and produce an affirmative; in other languages, doubled negatives intensify the negation. Languages where multiple negatives affirm each other are said to have negative concord. Portuguese, English, Persian, Russian, Spanish, Neapolitan and Italian are examples of negative-concord languages, while Latin and German do not...
 
All the examples in microsyntax.sites.yale.edu/negative-concord are, um, extremely colloquial.
 
@FaheemMitha Are you just trying to win an argument about how to define "double negative"? Seems a bit pointless. As I said, it's bad, ambiguous terminology. You should just avoid using the term.
 
11:33 PM
@sumelic Not really, no. Just looking for a definition. If there is no agreed upon definition, then fine.
Winning arguments is for high school debate teams.
 
@FaheemMitha To a linguist "extremely colloquial" sounds like "extremely normal" ;)
 
@curiousdannii Hmm.
 
@FaheemMitha "Languages where multiple negatives affirm each other are said to have negative concord."
 
But @Mitch a little while back said my sentence wasn't a "double negative". Which suggests he thought there was a definition.
@curiousdannii Yes, I read the page.
 
Congratulations, @tchrist and @MετάEd.
 
11:36 PM
The Yale page says:
 
@KitZ.Fox Thanks. :)
 
> Negative concord is a phenomenon in which more than one negative element occurs in a sentence, but the sentence is interpreted as only being negated once.
And the first example is:
> I ain't never been drunk.
I think we all know what the hypothetical speaker means. But Standard English would disagree that that is what he was actually saying.
 
@FaheemMitha Sure, but that's not a sentence from Standard English.
 
@curiousdannii My point exactly. I cling to Standard English like a drowning man clings to a lifebelt. Fault me if you must.
 
@Lawrence Several users noted that you comported yourself well. I hope you aren't discouraged.
 
11:40 PM
@FaheemMitha Cling to it all you want, but don't say that negative concord isn't grammatically sensible or is poorly defined.
 
@FaheemMitha Yes, he was using the definition where "double negative" means "negative concord in a sentence with two negative words." This definition is common, since it has to be what is meant in statements like "double negatives are not good English." But as you can see in that Wikipedia article, some people also apply the term "double negative" to standard English sentences with two negative words, one of which negates the other.
 
@curiousdannii Hmm. I maintain it isn't sensible.
 
Wikipedia is the worst
 
@sumelic Yes, I can see that the meaning of the term "double negative" doesn't seem to be universally agreed upon.
 
@FaheemMitha You're casting a value judgement on dozens, probably hundreds of languages! Why?
 
11:42 PM
@curiousdannii Uh. I plead the Fifth.
 
@FaheemMitha You can just think of it as a case of multiple meanings for a word. For speakers with negative concord, "never" can also have the meaning of "ever."
 
@FaheemMitha Why is saying that marking negativity on one sentence component any more sensible than marking it on all the applicable components?
 
Time to go to sleep, I think. Bye, guys. Thanks for all the viewpoints.
 
Now that we have positive concord about negative concord, how about concord about grapes?
Which reminds me of a joke...
What's purple and commutes?
 
Multiplying pansies.
 
11:55 PM
An abelian grape!
 
Thanks for not using the obvious comeback.
 
Wocka wocka!!!
 
@Mitch What's purple and has had all its offspring committed to mental institutions?
A simple grape: it has no normal subgrapes.
 
What was the obvious comeback?
@Randal'Thor nice!
 

« first day (2112 days earlier)      last day (2812 days later) »