Ah, thanks for pointing that out. I saw neither the disclaimer for new users, nor the disclaimer in tags since I've joined, nor have I noticed the sourceless posts. I focus mostly on the text of the questions and their answers.
For space cadets like me, I think nothing short of text within an answer would suffice to inform me of this disclaimer. I'm beginning to lean towards the stricter side of the modesty debate. Are we responsible when there are disclaimers in place, but people don't see them? Are we better off just not discussing these topics to be safe? This is very worrisome. I am very thankful to Double AA for sourcing that mishnah in chagigah, and to you for pointing it out to me in meta.
I really think that the only way to ensure that absolutely everyone is informed that answers about sexuality are effectively speculation without a rabbinic consult is to have a 'can't miss' disclaimer applied universally to the tag. I wouldn't feel comfortable supplying answers without one.
Is it possible for a note like the ones present in the search page and the tag description to appear on the question page? with a CYLOR sort of disclaimer?
@BabySeal I've edited the wiki excerpt for sexuality to incorporate the note used in the halacha tag. That part's easy.
Adding a disclaimer to some part of the page other than the posts themselves (like a tag-dependent boilerplate block) isn't within our power. The best solution there is to edit a note into your answers, like you did for yours there. Some people usually add "CYLOR" or variants, linking to the meta post that Hod linked, on halacha questions. This is up to individual answerers.
Okay. The question that remains I guess is what should be done if an answer is brought without a disclaimer or without even sources. But that's for you the moderators to decide. Thank you for being so friendly, accommodating, and quick in your responses!
@BabySeal well actually, it's for the community to decide. We don't impose rules; we act to apply community will. So let's see what happens to the meta discussion over the next few days.
@BabySeal and if the consensus is that we want that kind of notice in each answer, then if there's a post that doesn't do so (but otherwise is a suitable answer), then anybody at all is free to edit it in (or propose an edit, depending on your rep). In other words, if you see a problem, act.
(oddly enough, I was led to this room while researching things on meta SO, contemplating writing an automated moderation script, and stumbling on this)
@Dan sure, but there's a script to intercept at least some problem posts, and all caps is a good thing to take into account.
@Dan I'm having trouble imagining that. I mean, it's possible for somebody to have something useful to say (not a troll etc) but be typing in all caps for some bizarre reason, but in that case I want the system to make him try again anyway.
@BabySeal [Just catching up on backread.] How about only on sexuality-halacha questions (not on all sexuality questions)?
@BabySeal If you think such (questions or) answers need an in-post notice, you should raise the issue as a separate question post on Mi Yodeya Meta IMO so people can discuss the idea and voice support for or opposition to it.
[^ Thanks for the "question post" idea, @IsaacMoses.]
@MonicaCellio I did, because I made the feature request on MSO, q.v. with its comments, and wanted to (and did) link to the previous conversation therefrom.
@msh210 I personally think it should be on all, just in case a halacha could be, (mistakenly), inferred from answers to a question. I think erring on the side of caution here is best, given the subject matter, (judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/34217/…). I will make a meta question.
@ray Thank you for your objection to my answer to that question. In retrospect I had no business sourcing the Rambam or the Talmud in that way. You are a Shachen Tov
So I'm re-entering the workplace after being a SAHM (Stay At Home Mom).
As a religious jew, I have always gone by my Hebrew name (common for my demographic) and that is how everyone refers to me (it's on my utilities, was used in the workplace prior, and it's how all friends/family address me). ...
@Chad Thanks for asking. IMO, it's hard to see how this would be on-topic here, as the Judaism aspect is, as far as I can tell, entirely incidental. It's more about "I'm used to this name in this context and this name in this context."
... There may be a different aspect of the situation that OP would be interested in asking here, such as "Is it meritorious to use one's Hebrew name in all circumstances?"
I'm trying to brush up on my Hebrew. As an American Jew, it is still important to me to be able to recite my prayers from the siddur in their original Hebrew.
How do I pronounce "yod" when there is a dot inside of it? Here's how it appeared in my most recent Hebrew lesson: ׁׁׁׁשִיֵּץ
@IsaacMoses ^^^ My knowledge of grammar ain't too good :-), but I rember reading years ago about this gemination (new word for me) business, but it struck me that I had never heard anyone do this. And I see that although some modern siddurim (e.g. Artscroll) indicate where there is a sheva na, I haven't seen similar treastment of the gemmy thingy.
So, are there people who do this, as individuals or as groups? I would ask this as a question but I'm afraid I would reveal my ignorance by asking it incorrectly.
@MoshePeston It's distinguished from dagesh kal in, e.g. Sidur Rinat Yisrael and Tikkun Lakore-im Simanim
@MoshePeston I do. I've heard others, too. I can't recall precisely which teacher or role model first said that I should. Probably my mother.
@jake, I think a dagesh chazak can sometimes make a difference to the meaning. For example, "ganav" (w/o dagesh in the 'nun') means "he stole," while "gannav" (w/ dagesh in the 'nun') means "theif." (The vowelization in that case is different too, I think, going from kamatz-patach to patach-kamatz, but that distinction is not audible in some pronunciation schemes.) — Isaac MosesMar 8 at 20:17
"In ASHREI, CHANUN V’RACHUM, the NUN in CHANUN is DAGESHed and therefore stressed. chaNNNun. This becomes important, because CHANUN without a DAGESH in the NUN has a different meaning. With the DAGESH (which the NUN has in this pasuk), the word describes G-d as Merciful or Compassionate. CHANUN without the DAGESH is a description of one who is the recipient of someone else’s mercy. It might appear trifling to talk about the emphasis of a DAGESH CHAZAK.
So many of us don’t pay attention to them in our pronunciation of Hebrew. But listen carefully to a BAAL T’FILA or BAAL KOREI who does say the DAGESH properly. It is such a pleasure to hear it. And in the case of CHANUN, it astually makes a difference in meaning. So it isn’t so trifling after all."
@MoshePeston Happy for the opportunity to keep riding this hobby horse. Note that I used the word "exceptionally" in my answer advisedly.
In general, we do our best to avoid duplicating questions; we close them and leave them as a permanent signpost towards the original question. We don't delete them, because they often contain slightly different information which may allow people to find them differently. Sometimes, a moderator may decide to transfer answers from the duplicate to the original.
I understand that there is a Community Wiki, but I've never found it. Where would I find a link to take me there? Is there a way that we can have a more obvious connection to the CW page?
@MoshePeston I have to object to your comment about a 'telling and prejudiced choice', here judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/34228/…. That understanding exists in Tanach and is perfectly viable. What you wrote seems a bit like mud slinging, and it drew a response, hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/7788/…. I think that comments should remain as objective as possible, and arguments of this nature should avoid personal attacks.