« first day (352 days earlier)      last day (1883 days later) » 

2:15 AM
@MonicaCellio I talked to one of my pastors about 137. Turns out he did a paper on it in seminary. I'm working on an answer to it on the basis of my conversation with him.
2:48 AM
@Kazark Cool! Thanks for following up.
13 hours later…
4:09 PM
@MonicaCellio I think you are right about this:
Q: What does "invoke the name of the LORD" mean in Genesis?

GraceThe following two passages both use the phrase "invoked the LORD by name". Genesis 4:26 (ESV) 26  To Seth also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh. At that time people began to call upon the name of the Lord. Genesis 12:8 (ESV) 8  From there he moved to the hill co...

It does seem to be too close to the other question for both to be left open - the question is which should we close as the duplicate (I don't think it necessarily has to be the more recent one - perhaps the better quality question)
Another possibility would be to actually merge the Qs - which might be possible if all the answers to both are a good fit for one of the questions (possibly with an edit)
@JonEricson or anyone else please chip in with your thoughts if you'd like to?
@JackDouglas I was thinking about how to resolve that very issue yesterday, but got dragged into other things.
One thought I had was to take out the Gen. 4:26 and focus on Gen. 12:8. But I think that would screw with the answers.
Another thought was to make the more recent question focus on the contrast between one usage and the other. Again, it might be too late for that.
@JackDouglas That seems like a good idea. I don't think I've ever seen a question merge in action, however.
@JonEricson first close one as a dupe then a mod can merge, but it is usually for pretty much identical questions so we'd have to be sure we were doing the right thing.
Is the older Q in essence a subset of the newer?
> What does it mean to "call on the name of the Lord"?
> What does “invoke the name of the LORD” mean in Genesis?
quotes from each
if we don't think so, we can link them together in the comments
Close as dup is usually better. If you want to merge answers, the thing to do is close as dup with the target you want to keep, then merge, then in merge to get the dup question back but leave the answers on it deleted.
@JackDouglas It doesn't seem to be. Or at least, none of the answers consider the question of how the phrase is used elsewhere in Genesis.
Until we decide for sure what to do, I've commented on the older Q:
closely related question hereJack Douglas 44 secs ago
4:23 PM
Or at least none of them pick up the Genesis 12 connection. I see now that they do look at the phrase in a broad sense.
@JonEricson The older question asks "what changed", focusing on the text at that place. The newer one asks "what does this phrase mean", and doesn't seem to be as interested in historical context. Some of the answers to the older question wouldn't fit the newer one as asked. But they're too similar to not do something. I'm not sure what to do. Maybe the cross-linking is enough?
I think I'd prefer to see the older question focus on Gen 4 and the newer one on Gen 12, moving/editing answers as necessary, but I'm not sure.
@MonicaCellio Yeah. I think I'm biased because my answer wouldn't work. :-(
@JonEricson that's probably true of mine too.
@JonEricson btw, I haven't checked a concordance. Are these the only two uses, or are there more?
So maybe we should see if we could a) expand the new question to be all uses of the phrase or b) just focus on 12:8 and link the two questions as they are now.
@JonEricson Ok. In that case, maybe we should: (1) keep the focus of the older question on Gen 4 and "what did it mean for that context"), and (b) broaden the newer question for all uses, and (c) have the newer question explicitly point to the older as one case whose analysis isn't broadly applicable.
I haven't actually read through all those cases, but the next several don't look exceptional. I suspect they're all covered by the same answer(s). But "what changed the first time" is a different, highly-related question and can be called out IMO.
4:36 PM
@MonicaCellio Sounds good to me. @Jack Douglas: do you think that works?
@MonicaCellio The 4:26 instance really is unique.
Sounds good
@MonicaCellio unfortunately we can't move answers piecemeal if that was what you meant btw
Ok. I'll take a crack at it.
@JonEricson great, thanks
4:53 PM
@JackDouglas yeah, I was thinking more that if we reframe the questions we can then leave comments asking people to move answers where that makes sense. Or, more likely, edit.
@MonicaCellio ah - ok. I forget you are a mod on another site so know about these things :-)
If any answers are downright invalidated, we can edit into the body something like "this answer applied to a previous version of the question".
@JackDouglas well, not all the things, but I learned that partial merges don't work when I proposed it for something over there. So that one I know. :-)
5:11 PM
Does this look ok?
Q: What does "invoke the name of the LORD" mean in Genesis?

GraceThe phrase "call upon the name of the LORD" turns up occasionally in Genesis: Genesis 12:8 (ESV) 8  From there he moved to the hill country on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. And there he built an altar to the Lord and called upon th...

Let's see, this version invalidates Mike's answer, which answered the other question.
Sticmann's answer is ok, but needs to not refer to Mike's (or turn into a link).
Kazark's answer is really good, but needs to be split between the two.
Bob's on the other question actually fits better on the new question.
@JonEricson are you planning to comment on each of them?
good edit btw
@JackDouglas Yes. I wanted to make sure my change was good first. ;-)
@JackDouglas Off to comment!
5:57 PM
@MonicaCellio Anyone know if there's a meta question suggesting piecemeal answer moves besides:
Q: Allow high rep users to migrate answers from one question to another

Lance RobertsI'm adding this feature request to have high-rep users (15k?) to be able to migrate answers from one question to another, so that questions for duplicate answers can be consolidated. Of course, there would have to be parameters, and a complete historical record, so that it could be reversed if m...

That resulted in the rational merge logic, but isn't exactly helpful here.
6:08 PM
@JonEricson that looks great! Thanks for the work.
@JonEricson I'm not aware of other questions on this. (I just checked my MSO bookmarks and found nothing. It's the sort of thing I would have bookmarked if I'd seen it, but I miss a lot of MSO questions just due to the sheer quantity.)
@MonicaCellio Ok. The easiest way to find a question it seems is to ask a dup. ;-) I'm going to propose moving answers as a moderator power.
6:27 PM
@JonEricson thanks. Please link here when you do so I can find it. :-)
2 hours later…
8:11 PM
Q: Can moderators be allowed to move answers to other questions piecemeal?

Jon EricsonA similar request resulted in our sane merge process. That works great if the questions are really duplicates and if all the answers apply. But sometimes the Venn diagram looks more like this: If one question asks just about A and another comes along and asks about B, it can make sense to re...

8:50 PM
@JonEricson complete with venn diagrams -- nice!
Thanks for asking.
@MonicaCellio I'll leave the freehand circles for the answers. ;)
@JonEricson wow, you've been around SE for a while! (I wondered how you'd accumulated 4k rep on MSO and looked at your profile. Yearling x3! :-) )
@MonicaCellio I was a beta user on SO when I wondered if it would be a better USENET than USENET. It was/is.
@JonEricson I dropped off of Usenet in the mid-90s -- I still read some groups after the Eternal September, relying more and more on filters, until eventually I moved most of my Unix-based work to a new host that didn't have it and I decided that was ok. Mailing lists filled the gap for me for a long time, and still do for the ones where people actually still use email. But now there's a much bigger ecosystem. SE fits very nicely into it for me -- targeted Q&A, but for conversations there's chat.
@MonicaCellio I'm sorry I was part of Eternal September. My school didn't start until October, so I was a bit late. ;-)
9:05 PM
@JonEricson September happened every year, but I have trouble believing that you didn't catch on pretty quickly, so no "eternal" for you!

« first day (352 days earlier)      last day (1883 days later) »