PAA:

First post – excellent, thanks. (I’d seen that post, and really should have remembered it.)

Second post – Regarding your first subtitle, I think that’s how subtitles were originally meant to work.

Regarding your second subtitle, it was actually – very briefly –

“Baki in all things ?????” before changing to your current one,

which is most definitely not a typo, but was made in response to your assertions about genai in the thread you linked to.

(That’s another one of those threads I haven’t gotten around to

thoroughly reading and thoroughly responding to…)

I found both the subtitle change and your response (which you linked here) hilarious.

You can ask the mods and other posters for confirmation – it sounds like you didn’t see the interim subtitle.

I don’t have the time I would need to go through everything wrong with that booklet.

PAA:

I commend you on the triplical impressive feat...

“Triplical” is not (really) a word. Wiktionary has no entry for it and any instances of its use found on Google appear to be either in error or as a proper noun in some obscure historic context.

“Triplicate,” if that is what you meant, would be incorrect in this instance – it does not refer to non-identical things or sets thereof.

“Triple” would have been the right word, even if it

isn’t sesquipedalian enough for your taste.

Also, “triple” would correctly have been after “impressive,”

not before.

That is hardly an excuse. [Insert sarcasticon if desired.]

Please explain your use of sarcasm here.

Little Froggie:

Well, I must admit defeat for the moment. Google doesn’t

seem able to get your scent…

Showjoe:

I didn’t know until I tried clicking on your new name to see if I needed to add you to the “Changed usernames” thread. It was simple to notice that the last post from that account was a year old.

btw my old account was with a "S" and my new is with a "s". my profile page the same

I’m not sure what you mean. If it’s that your profile pages also differ in the matter of having a capital S or not,that’s true.

Your profile addresses are essentially as follows, though:

Old account: theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/profile/showjoe

New account: theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/profile/sh0wj0e

(Because YWN URLs are not case-sensitive, you don’t need to type a capital S to see the profile named “Showjoe,” even though that

is how the link appears next to your old account’s posts.)

Letakein Girl:

Ah, I thought that might be it. At any rate, there certainly haven’t been 613 mods, just as there probably haven’t been 127 mods. I assume Mod-127 was named after the 127 years of the life of Sarah Imeinu and provinces of Achashveirosh’s kingdom, and as for 613…

There may not even have been 42 mods – Mod-42 might well be named for the number’s significance in the “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” series, especially considering that his subtitle is a reference to the title of one of the books in the series.

Mod-29 also appears to be a fan – see here.

Little Froggie:

Sigh! Next time, use “myself” instead of “my self,” and I won’t be

misled into thinking your entire self is being repeated, and you’re repeating the phrase to call attention to your specific phrasing.

Also: (ps what was your s/n back then? Sh..)

I didn’t have one. This is my first, and so far only, username.

Letakein Girl:

Why me?

Actually, I’m not sure he was real – his name isn’t formatted the same way the others’ are, and I can’t find his profile.

However, impersonating a mod is against the rules and probably

wouldn’t have been tolerated.

I wrote earlier:

“The answer to part of your question about names is that to begin with, the URL and displayed name are the same, so unless the displayed name is changed twice, no record is needed.”

EDIT:

For the mods, anyway – I assume they can see your profile URL. For normal users, the profile URL linked to next to your posts will usually be the same as your current name.

This is why my “Changed usernames” thread exists, though it won’t help if a name is changed another time after it is recorded there, and it works only through the efforts of volunteers…

Little Froggie:

Do you modify your own screen names? I see “New Kid On The Block” turned into – well, I can’t post it, can I – and someone has to have modified your current username.

I could see the mods doing this one to identify you for others, but you mentioned repeating “your self”).

Yes, yes, I know… That last one took two weeks – give me some time! (Just kidding.)

SIDI:

The CR can’t win with you, eh?

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/what-happened-to-the-funny-side

Little Froggie:

It seems the mods liked your post. 🙂

Bumpius humorus! (First and fourth posts.)

(I found this Googling [nuclear zeeskite]. No, you can’t ask…)

Okay, that last one was post #6, except that it used to include my idea, which was rather more dramatic (and possibly illegal).

Wow, 6/6! I guess I’ve learned where the lines are (mostly).

Here’s a hint for them, Little Froggie:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/what-happened-to-the-funny-side

Or did you mean the part about being sorry for

repeating “your self”? I understand that one.

EDIT: Oops! This time I posted in the wrong thread – partially, anyway. That hint doesn’t apply to this thread – it would apply to the thread Little Froggie also posted in the wrong thread about.

The reason my last five posts aren’t together is that I wasn’t sure if they’d be approved. In fact, post #6 was blocked.

Little Froggie:

I’ve realized that your “Oh…” might have been just to make it look like your posting in the “wrong” thread was intentional, but

you might actually have posted here instead of in that thread so that at least some people wouldn’t know what you were talking about. That you haven’t also posted it in that thread makes me think you were trying to keep it private (or maybe you just specifically wanted me to know for some odd reason – such as the interest I’ve expressed in the subject in the past).

Speaking of which, I am aware of all the identities you gave initials for in a certain post, but I don’t know who the “etc.” was for. Will you give me those initials too?

So, mod, will you admit that sometimes you (or rather the other mod/s) change posts instead of completely rejecting them?

I wish that would happen to mine more often…

“Exterminate – Famine and flu

Captivity – Destruction too”

In a list with famine, captivity, and destruction,

doesn’t flu look out a little of place? 🙂

There’s a term for that: “Arson, murder, and jaywalking.”

cozimjewish:

Why did you think I was “a he”?

PAA: I’m sorry, what are you talking about? (Just kidding.)

Little Froggie:

1)

I assume “Oh…” was your edited-in realization that you’d put your post up in the wrong thread? You could’ve changed the post

to a request that it be removed and then posted it again in the right thread.

2)

Listen, I’ve known that for a long time, but the mods block virtually all posts about your former identities! I was trying to think of a way to tell you so in that thread that they would allow. Maybe they’ll let you answer cozimjewish’s question here (tell her I sent you):

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/just-testing-the-various-allowed-markups#post-538884

Little Froggie:

You’ve used that pun before.

11 months ago:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/three-chairs-for-the-mods#post-496647

10 months ago:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/random-facts-1#post-502679

9 months ago:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/open-letter-to-hellena-winston#post-506059

Eftachbchinor:

Oh, you meant the shaychus to “banned,” not to you. Hey, you’ve told me almost the same thing before, too!

#1 on your shidduch list

Looks like I don’t have trouble keeping CR members straight. 🙂

Gavra at work:

Of course it doesn't, and that is not what I said. Straw Man.

Not on purpose. Here’s the quote again, with some context. I think you should be able to see how I’d make that mistake.

However, in our times, it is promoted by Yeshivos & Sems that everyone should be in Kollel (not just those who really want it). That means support from parents, grandparents and others, raised tuition/Chessed requirements on everyone (due to those who choose to take the easy way out and are not learning 12-14 hours a day) as JFem points out, as well as (partially) an understanding of the costs of poverty on the children of the Kollel system (which is not their choice or fault). This forces/guilts others into supporting them.

To quote the Gemorah in Chaggigah (5B):

??? ???? ???? ???”? ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ?????

RECAP (this has gotten complicated):

1. Writersoul:

I do see a lot of extremely depressing roadkill, though; baruch Hashem though I’ve yet to have caused one myself.

2. Joseph [as chuvim]:

Why do you assume stepping on a bug isn’t as bad as running over a bird or skunk?

3. PAA:

I don’t see th[at] assumption anywhere in this thread.

4. Randomex:

Joseph was referring to Writersoul’s statement that she herself has not caused any roadkill – he assumes she has stepped on insects (sounds reasonable to me).

5. PAA:

As you point out that is an assumption. But let’s grant the assumption. I still don’t see how being thankful that you haven’t killed any larger animals, indicates that it is worse than killing insects. You can’t be thankful for not killing insects if you have in fact killed insects. Hence my objection.

If anything chuvim (Joseph)’s question would have been closer to being a valid question if writersoul HADN”T ever killed an insect – then at least there is a possible implication that it’s worse to kill animals, from the fact that writersoul is thankful that she has never killed any but did not express thankfullness that she hasn’t killed insects. Though it still wouldn’t be such a

good question because you can simply answer that the topic being discussed here is animals, so there is no reason to start talking about insects just for the sake of expressing thankfulness.

6. PAA:

Also, maybe the statement of thankfulness for not killing insects is what got edited.

7. Lior:

What would’ve been so objectionable about saying that to have been edited out?

8. PAA:

Maybe the Moderator feels that it is in fact worse to kill animals than to kill insects and allowing the post would have equated the two so he had no choice but to edit it.

9. PAA:

Also, a careful reading of the post shows that writersoul may actually have killed animals as well: The statement “I’ve yet to have caused one myself” is referring back to the statement of “I do see a lot of extremely depressing roadkill” so all it means is that writersoul never caused a DEPRESSING roadkill. If that is the case then the thankfulness is not for not killing animals;

it’s for not killing them in a depressing way which obviously doesn’t apply to insects which are never killed in a depressing way. So chuvim (Joseph)’s question is all the more baseless.

10. Randomex:

One wonders what Writersoul could possibly have had in that post that needed to be edited out. I guess we’ll never know.

11. PAA:

"One wonders what Writersoul could possibly have had in that post that needed to be edited out. I guess we'll never know."

I thought I answered that already.

12. PAA:

To answer the original question, the Gemara in Chagigah (16a) says:

??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?????… ???? ?????

?????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???????? ??? ?????

The Iyun Yaakov quotes a Medrash in Bereishis Rabbah which has a fourth similarity to animals – humans die like animals. He therefore asks why the Gemara doesn’t list it. He answers: ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???”? ?????? ???? ???? ?”? ???? ????? ??? ?”? ??? ??”?

13. Randomex:

Maybe the Moderator feels that it is in fact worse to kill animals than to kill insects and allowing the post would have equated the two so he had no choice but to edit it.

Mods aren’t allowed to block things just because they disagree with them.

Also, a careful reading of the post shows that writersoul may actually have killed animals as well: The statement "I've yet to have caused one myself" is referring back to the statement of "I do see a lot of extremely depressing roadkill" so all it means is that writersoul never caused a DEPRESSING roadkill.

Here’s a reasonable assumption – Writersoul finds all

roadkill depressing, and “extremely depressing” was meant to express a feeling about “roadkill,” not to modify (and thus limit) it, whether that is correct usage or not.

If that is the case then the thankfulness is not for not killing animals; it's for not killing them in a depressing way which obviously doesn't apply to insects which are never killed in a depressing way. So chuvim (Joseph)'s question is all the more baseless.

Chuvim’s question assumes (“as bad as”) that Writersoul believes there is something bad about running over a bird or skunk. This appears to be baseless. It is understandable that Writersoul’s feeling about roadkill is that it is depressing, and it can be assumed that she does not feel this way about insects (as demonstrated by your assumption that this non-feeling is

universal – “insects which are never killed in a depressing way”).

I thought I answered that already. [What was edited out of Ws's post]

No, you theorized, and that theory can be presumed false.

14. PAA:

"Mods aren't allowed to block things just because they disagree with them."

True in theory. But there is no system of checks and balances in the Coffee Room.

"Here's a reasonable assumption - Writersoul finds all

roadkill depressing, and "extremely depressing" was meant to express a feeling about "roadkill," not to modify (and thus limit) it, whether that is correct usage or not."

That would just make it that there are three levels – non-depressing, depressing, and extremely depressing.

"Chuvim's question assumes ("as bad as") that Writersoul believes there is something bad about running over a bird or skunk. This appears to be baseless. It is understandable that Writersoul's feeling about roadkill is that it is depressing, and it can be assumed that she does not feel this way about

insects (as demonstrated by your assumption that this non-feeling is universal - "insects which are never killed in a depressing way")."

You are just adding another kashya on Chuvim’s question.

"No, you theorized, and that theory can be presumed false."

First of all, since when can theories be presumed false? Second of all, you said “One wonders what Writersoul could POSSIBLY [emphasis mine] have had in that post that needed to be edited out.” In order to adequately answer that all I have to do is provide a possibility.

15. RebYidd23:

Theories can be presumed false when they are obviously false.

16. PAA:

1) Why was my theory obviously false?

2) If it’s obviously false you wouldn’t need to PRESUME it false.

17. RebYidd23:

1) I didn’t say your theory was false.

2) Because the person to whom it is obvious can still be wrong.

18. PAA:

So the question is can someone presume a theory to be false because to him it is obviously false? Well I think it depends on the person’s status and the subject matter of the theory. I am alleging that Randomex is not of the caliber to presume my (perfectly reasonable) theory to be false.

19. PAA:

So for anyone who still cares, the ORIGINAL QUESTION was: “Ever seen a forest animal die of old age”

Which I answered:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/ever-seen-a-forest-animal-die-of-old-age#post-537335

eftachbchinor:

LF: My little amphibian friend, your name is from the greek word "amphi-bios", meaning "double life".

? ? Pam-pah-dah-dam! Captain Obvious!? ?

“Little Froggie” does not come from “amphi-bios.”

If you know your CR history, though… 🙂

cozimjewish

randomex is really really helpful

Or maybe just likes to show off knowledge.

Mod-100, that was a joke!