« first day (3841 days earlier)      last day (80 days later) » 

12:20 AM
 
 
5 hours later…
4:54 AM
@Mitch don't mention it
@CowperKettle How many people are wondering if the US is bigger than Antarctica?
 
 
1 hour later…
5:58 AM
@CowperKettle I didn’t realize the u.S. was so big. I would love to see Russia superimposed on Antarctica.
@M.A.R. Note that’s only the lower 48.
 
 
2 hours later…
8:01 AM
 
 
3 hours later…
11:16 AM
While I don't want to stop people discussing the Israel/Palestine conflict, I think that it is such a hot button topic that it would help keep this room calm if the discussion had its own room.
 
11:54 AM
Average annual temperatures in the USA
 
12:15 PM
@MattE.Эллен I wouldn't call it a 'conflict', but thank you for creating the new room.
 
No worries!
 
12:48 PM
@M.A.R. I just wanted to make sure your contribution was acknowledged.
@MattE.Эллен Can we talk about 'talking about it'? I'm assuming 3rd order questions are fair game but not sure about 2nd order.
Maybe it depends on whether we're talking about 'talking about the Israeli/Palestinian thing' or 'talking abstractly about ... uh ...' those kinds of things.
 
@Mitch I'm mostly concerned with the volatility of discourse in here. there are ... people on the SE chat network (noöne from here) who have been being extra spicy and I am being a bit preëmptive about where the heat is contained. So you can talk about talking about it
 
1:26 PM
@MattE.Эллен Next topic: diæëresis and ligature?
Burn the whole thing down
 
what if the ligature is automatic? you can't blame someone for their OS!
 
@MattE.Эллен Is the problem that people are saying things that are wrong or that they are fucking Nazis?
 
well, font rendering system at least
@Mitch people being deliberate wind up merchants
 
@MattE.Эллен M👁️ OS replaces 👁️t w👁️th emoj👁️
 
1:31 PM
As an old, I want to use emojis to look cool but my OS makes me use an alternate keyboard like I'm typing in Arabic and zhuyin at the same time.
Which brings up the next topic, can you use emojis in Chinese text? Or really -do- people use emojis in Chinese text and do they mean the same things as in English?
 
that is a good question
🧐
 
Chinese characters, while sharing some similarities with emojis, actually have meaning.
I meant that to sting.
Did that sting?
Probably not.
No one's listening.
🐝
 
if by "sting" you mean made me do a snort laugh, yes
 
Also as an old, I really have a hard time -seeing- which emoji it is.
 
On the other hand, if you meant "glow blue in the presence of orcs" then no
 
1:35 PM
They're so small
 
yeah, tiddly little glyphs
 
like in a font size 5 times too small for the font size it is in.
 
at least on phones they're proportional
 
@MattE.Эллен Wait...you can get emojis to... oh. oh... I get it. Look man I read Percy Grainger and the Hermione of Fire too.
@MattE.Эллен Oh. Yeah. On what's app on a phone they're big enough to see the difference between laughing-so-hard-I'm-crying and 'crying'
See how old I am? I spelled it "What's app". That's awful.
 
😭😂🤣😅😥😪😓
 
1:39 PM
I need to check myself in to the 'old' ward.
 
the 7 stages of grief
 
@MattE.Эллен Exactly
By 'exactly' I mean I cannot tell the difference among any of those, but I'm pretty sure you used two different emojis... maybe they're all distinct I don't know
cripes now I have to double-plus upsize this
 
each one is a different smiley face
 
omg
I really though maybe it's just a single one with a little optical illusion, at most maybe two.
but...
That is one good looking bull
 
@Mitch crazy, I know. I don't know if they're meant to mean different things or what
@Mitch looks mean
 
1:44 PM
I did research. They have very distinct meanings. I just don't know what they are.
@MattE.Эллен Don't look at the horns. The face is angelic.
Also probably chewing
resting bull face
 
as noöne's old grandpappy used to say "if a cow ain't chewin, it's probly dead",
 
My grandfather never used to say "Like chewing on a dead cow" for times when you're chewing on a dead cow.
 
> “Prophet!” said I, “thing of evil!
prophet still, if bird or devil!
Do you think that's bad rhyming?
evil has a long /i/ and devil has a short schwa. I know you're not supposed to pay attention to the length of the syllables in English poetry, but still it stood out to me. I thought maybe it's at least not the smoothest choice.
 
I would say good
 
1:54 PM
Alright then.
 
Robusto is usually a better judge than me
 
It's a nice poem anyway.
> Ah, distinctly I remember it was in the bleak December;
And each separate dying ember wrought its ghost upon the floor
God, the pictures.
> “Surely,” said I, “surely that is
something at my window lattice;
How about that one? /əz/ rhyming with /əs/?
 
yeah, not a rhyme for me
 
2:24 PM
What rule governs the usage of the definite article in the following example: "the stability of a protein refers to its ability to exist ..."
 
Good question...
 
2:49 PM
for one thing stability is a non-count noun, so it can't have the indefinite article
so then I guess there is a semantic difference between the sentence with the definite article and with the zero article.
 
@MattE.Эллен I don't think so. Both with or without "the" appear to unambiguiously convey the same information. It sounds better with "the" for me but I don't know why.
 
I think it's because it's not stability in general, it's stability as it pertains to protein
but don't quote me on that!
> [The zero article] usually occurs with plural and uncountable nouns that have a general meaning.
Also, on the same site grammartop.com/the-definite-article:
> We use ‘the’ to refer to specific things that are defined by a phrase, (often a relative clause), immediately following the noun:
although of isn't a relative pronoun, so that might not be relavant
but it could be argued that "of a protein" is defining the stablity
 
3:44 PM
@Færd That is an awful rhyme for me (AmE), it's not deevil or ehvil.
But there is a concept of 'spelling rhyme' which some people like to use.
I translate in my head 'spelling rhyme' to "not an actual rhyme' or 'I'm cheating' or 'I just can't think of a good word so fuck it this'll have to do'
@Færd That works for me. It's not a perfect rhyme but sounds good anyway.
@MattE.Эллен You know what's annoying? When a notification of a chat flag pops up, and you vote on it (yay! easy UI!) and then you wonder about the context... and then you can't find it. There's no list of voted on flags. I want to check the context, but now I can't.
 
@Mitch yeah. the system should force you to go to the room before you vote. but I guess if something it truly horrendous then it's better to deal with it quickly than go in search of context
 
eg this just in "I do. I've watched the last few days of chat as I catche up and the D&D hate is coming through loud and clear. If you say so. I'll let it go."
pretty innocuous to me.
 
yeh
With context, it still seems innocuous, but the conversation is definitely a bit heated
 
4:23 PM
Well, I would have had some minimal interest in seeing the conversation but I only had enough time to read the flag and c-p it, not enough with that UX to visit and judge well.
I often think authoritatively that simple taboo word recognition is awfully ... over simplified manner to judge for valid flag, but then that's what I can do in the short 5 seconds of the life of the chat flag.
Same with ... profanity.
 
4:38 PM
 
 
2 hours later…
6:36 PM
Nikolay Platoshkin, founder of a socialist movement titled "For New Socialism", may get 6 years of penal colony in Russia. The prosecutor has requested this term for him today. znak.com/2021-05-18/…
Putin is trying to suppress all non-controlled parties.
In a separate development, Head of the Chechnya Region recorded a video in which he promises to kill a person who called him a devil in a social network comment.
The Russian General Prosecutor's Office has a history of "not noticing" such statements made by Kadyrov, although it's a punishable crime in Russia.
 
6:54 PM
Few are worse than Kadyrov.
 
Why do English speakers use 'in person' wrong?
 
Because they're stupid?
 
@Cerberus I hoped for a nice discussion, but that seems to settle it.
 
7:10 PM
@Řídící In person? How dare you. In person your face!
@Řídící discussion reopened
 
 
1 hour later…
8:15 PM
@Řídící Haha you didn't give any examples, so what else was I supposed to say?
 
@Cerberus It seems many people seem to think that the 'person' applies to themselves as opposed to the person/thing they are meeting. Like: I saw the new iPad in person.
 
Hmm I see.
And you feel it should always apply to the object, not the subject?
 
@Cerberus Yes. Prove me wrong.
 
How?
 
@Cerberus I don't know. I could be completely wrong, for all I know.
 
8:21 PM
I think I would only use it when meeting a person, as you say.
But I'm not sure I could justify this as an absolute restriction.
Perhaps it sounds odd because, when you see a device, you would rather say something like, I saw it with my own eyes?
 
Actually, looking at some dictionaries, I might be wrong. Or English is wrong.
Or weird.
 
Or both.
 
8:44 PM
English is wrong alright
 
8:58 PM
English and America are always wrong.
 
Do I sense hurt pride?
 
You may pay your bill in person or . . . she appeared at the hearing in person . . . works either way. Always right.
 
Agreed.
 
Might makes right?
 
But seeing an object in person?
 
9:12 PM
Or a play or concert, vs. a film? Sure.
I have seen Bernstein conduct, but not in person . . .who’s not in person? Him or me?
 
Why not say, I saw the play live? Or I saw the play myself? Or, most emphatically, I saw it with my own eyes?
 
I saw the film with my own eyes . . .
Sure, there are always other ways to say something. Avoidance may be the most common method of skirting ambiguity and error.
When in doubt, recast.
 
But I think perhaps those alternative are always better than in person when the object is not a person.
In which case Ridici would be right not to use it that way.
 
I have never seen the Taj Mahal in person.
What could possibly be wrong with that?
 
I don't know, I don't think I would say that.
Because the simple alternative I have never seen the Taj Mahal myself is better?
 
9:25 PM
But you yourself have seen it, on film, TV, photos.
 
It just sounds like an expensive word where a simple one will do.
Which is generally not good style.
 
You know what it looks like. How can you not have seen it? You could say you’ve seen it in pictures etc., which would be more precise, of course.
 
I'm not sure I understand.
Myself and in person are intended to distinguish between seeing pictures and the actual object, aren't they?
 
Well, he’s arguing that if I say I’ve seen the Mona Lisa in person, which I have, that that’s wrong. I’m saying it’s not wrong, and is in fact a very direct way to get the point across. He could ask on ELL.
 
I'm a very out person person myself
@Xanne on more than one occasion
 
9:40 PM
“saw/seen it in person” comes up on NGram
Good one, @M.A.R.
 
@Xanne I could care less irregardless
If it's any solace, I have been wrong on more than one occasion as well.
Happens to the best of us
 
@Xanne I would say it is intelligible, and not "wrong", but infelicitous.
 
but at least you care.
 
9:59 PM
It’s been asked and answered on the main site. english.stackexchange.com/questions/52009/…
 
@Xanne Hah, the site knows everything.
But I think firsthand is much better in the context given there.
 
@Cerberus It is very natural. 'in person' is to emphasize that you were there as opposed to hearing about it or seeing it on TV/pictures/etc.
 
I think it is infelicitous for the reasons given.
 
“seen it for real” is probably the most common AmE conversational idiom
 
@Cerberus 'firsthand' is an OK synonym, but 'in person' is a little more direct. I sense no infelicity there.
 
10:07 PM
No, I tend to agree with Ridici.
 
@Cerberus wait...there are reasons for infelicity? which ones?
 
@Mitch That simpler alternatives are to be preferred?
See above.
 
'I saw it firsthand' is more formal?
I would never say that out loud (or internally)
'myself' is not specific enough (and really doesn't say if you were there or just saw a picture).
@Cerberus simpler != more felicitous
 
Xanne hides behind Mitch
 
steps to the side
 
10:16 PM
Oh dear
 
😂
 
@Mitch Generally, simpler is better, ceteris paribus.
fires shrapnel
 
That's a value judgment on lots of things, not a descriptive rule. Language doesn't always work with rules. It'd be simpler to for French to say 'nonante et neuf' yet they insist on 'quatre-vingt dix-neuf'
sends torpedo
stops torpedo
 
Who ever cares about descriptive rules?
 
but that could easily be a judgement of the French.
starts torpedo up again
@Cerberus We say what we say because others do and then we do. If there's logic that supports it that is just after the fact rationalization. It may make the pattern easier to generalize and remember but there's no guarantee that it is truly general.
torpedo senses magnetic field
 
10:29 PM
I don't see why I should care about any of this.
2
 
hopes it isn't my own ship
@Cerberus uh because the palestinian/israeli chat room is too hot with actual facts for you.
 
It's pretty hot.
I did do a fact dump.
 
It's actually pretty sedate considering what it could be.
@Cerberus 'dump' is a very ... evocative word.
 
Yeah, where are the bombs?
But, really, the discussion above was never about anything descriptive.
 
@Cerberus and not personal attacks.
@Cerberus wha?
 
10:32 PM
You mean attacks in person?
 
@Cerberus Right. I saw no indication at all of judging any person themselves for what they say.
Even if they are horribly horribly wrong.
You know who I'm talking about.
 
@Mitch If you mean "in person", then why didn't you say so? Were you perchance avoiding the word?
@Mitch *any person in person
 
11:33 PM
@Cerberus haha no. I totally meant -any- person. 'any' as in the negative concord for 'some'
 
@Mitch Heh I know.
Just expanding the joke.
 
I feel like emojis are not expressive enough. Like it's a little snapshot of one person's (or a committee of friends who are mostly identical) thinking up reactions.
@Cerberus oh
I'm humorless
I can give it out but I can't take it.
 
Then why did you laugh?
 
unless your saying that it was a joke is itself a joke.
 
Or at least type "haha".
 
11:35 PM
then
uh
yeah
@Cerberus oh
uh
what?
haha it was funny that you...
oh forget it
uno momentito
I have to have a sneezing fit...
 
11:54 PM
@Mitch Corona?
 

« first day (3841 days earlier)      last day (80 days later) »