Multi-thread discussions

[Frabjous]

How often do you check on a person before responding? I recently responded to a new thread which I didn’t know was continuing an old discussion and didn’t like where things went.

 

[berkeman]

Wakarimasen...

 

[Vanadium 50]

¿Que?

 

[Frabjous]

Now I have to report both of you for not posting in English

 

[fresh_42]

Now I have to report both of you for not posting in English

Good idea! I herewith demand that all members stop talking about eigenvalues and eigenvectors all the time! Banned are also 'ansatz', 'dreck', the use of $\mathbb{Z}$, or $K$ for fields. This list will occasionally be updated.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Banned are also 'ansatz', 'dreck'

How about banning V and V4 for the Group that isn't C4/Z4 too?

 

[fresh_42]

How about banning V and V4 for the Group that isn't C4/Z4 too?

As a physicist, I would be more worried about the dreibein.

 

[berkeman]

Now I have to report both of you for not posting in English

Lo siento. (oops, sorry for stepping on V50's toes there...)

Now back to the OP -- what in theee world were you talking about?

 

[Frabjous]

Lo siento. (oops, sorry for stepping on V50's toes there...)

Now back to the OP -- what in theee world were you talking about?

There are people who when they do not get the answer they like, go and create other threads with slightly different questions. It is really annoying when one tries to answer one of these threads and it starts to go off the rails because they are looking not for an answer, but validation.
I was curious if people checked a person’s previous posts before responding.

 

[berkeman]

There are people who when they do not get the answer they like, go and create other threads with slightly different questions. It is really annoying when one tries to answer one of these threads and it starts to go off the rails because they are looking not for an answer, but validation.
I was curious if people checked a person’s previous posts before responding.

I check poster histories all the time, but that's because of my Mentor tendencies. But if you ever suspect something is fishy in a post or thread, please click the Report link on the post sooner rather than later. We usually can check out the thread pretty quickly when it's reported to us. Thanks.

 

[phinds]

Good idea! I herewith demand that all members stop talking about eigenvalues and eigenvectors all the time! Banned are also 'ansatz', 'dreck', the use of $\mathbb{Z}$, or $K$ for fields. This list will occasionally be updated.

Could we please add gedankenexperiment to the list? Every time I see it I think someone is being thanked for an experiment.

 

[Vanadium 50]

But can we keep Zitterbewegung? That's fun to say. Like FahrfigNewton.

 

[jtbell]

Could we please add gedankenexperiment to the list? Every time I see it I think someone is being thanked for an experiment.

...or someone just sneezed in the lab?

 

[phinds]

...or someone just sneezed in the lab?

No, the German for "thanks" is danke, so gedankenexperiment should mean "thanks for the experiment"

 

[fresh_42]

No, the German for "thanks" is danke, so gedankenexperiment should mean "thanks for the experiment"

And it's even worse: one cannot afford to make a spelling error, since Gedenkenexperiment would mean an experiment about memorializing!

 

[berkeman]

No, the German for "thanks" is danke, so gedankenexperiment should mean "Gee! Thanks for the experiment"

Fixed it for you.

 

[phinds]

The German equivalent for "God bless you" when someone sneezes is Gesundheit, so a German hears:
Sneeze
Gesundheit

What I always heard was
Sneeze
Sneeze

 

[fresh_42]

The German equivalent for "God bless you" when someone sneezes is Gesundheit, so a German hears:
Sneeze
Gesundheit

What I always heard was
Sneeze
Sneeze

Gesundheit simply means health. We do not see a necessity to bother God with it.

 

[phinds]

Gesundheit simply means health. We do not see a necessity to bother God with it.

Yeah, but it still sounds like a sneeze.

 

[fresh_42]

Yeah, but it still sounds like a sneeze.

It is pronounced: guehsoonedhite.

 

[pinball1970]

It is pronounced: guehsoonedhite.

@phinds
Are you going to jump in at any point?
Thread heading in a northern direction now taken a path to the west.

 

[fresh_42]

Thread heading in a northern direction now taken a path to the west.

I think the issue was, that the first two questions never have been answered, and nobody fully understood post number one. What does it mean to check on a person, and what for?

I recently responded to a new thread which I didn’t know was continuing an old discussion

So?

and didn’t like where things went.

In the new or in the old thread. Any links?

What is the conclusion of all this?

 

[Frabjous]

I think the issue was, that the first two questions never have been answered, and nobody fully understood post number one. What does it mean to check on a person, and what for?

So?

In the new or in the old thread. Any links?

What is the conclusion of all this?

Q1. I mean to look at some of their previous posts to see if they are worth the effort.
Q2. It’s annoying.
Q3. New thread. The OP was stubborn in the old thread and stuck to it in the new one. No need to name names.
Q4. No conclusion. I was just trying to ask if people checked the posts of people they didn’t recognize before responding to their questions.

 

[pinball1970]

I think the issue was, that the first two questions never have been answered, and nobody fully understood post number one. What does it mean to check on a person, and what for?

So?

In the new or in the old thread. Any links?

What is the conclusion of all this?

I elucidated reasons why synth drums should not have been pushed forward onto the musical community just because technology allowed.
Context played a part and I think @phinds jumped in after one or two posts to steady the thread. In my view it was not that tangential.
Not as much as yours and other posters in this instance. Was my point.

 

[phinds]

I was just trying to ask if people checked the posts of people they didn’t recognize before responding to their questions.

That's a waste of time 90% of the time and since no one can tell WHICH 90% I think most of us just answer the question and move on.

 

[Bystander]

Q4. No conclusion. I was just trying to ask if people checked the posts of people they didn’t recognize before responding to their questions.

Once upon a time; have since learned to apply the ancient adage, "Do NOT feed the trolls."

 

[strangerep]

We do not see a necessity to bother God with it.

... especially since He/She sneezes down upon us quite frequently.

 

[Rive]

I was just trying to ask if people checked the posts of people they didn’t recognize before responding to their questions.

Some opening questions can be suspicious enough to induce a preventive history check, but it's really rare. In general, if somebody wants to turn a new leaf, then I'm OK with it.

If he is not really successful with starting anew then pinging a mentor would do the trick: and so the litter would be gathered in one bin.