Timeline for What about a terminology reference question?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://bicycles.stackexchange.com/ with https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:45 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.electronics.stackexchange.com/ with https://electronics.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 5, 2014 at 23:33 | comment | added | Nick T | @W5VO there's only one place that will do. | |
| May 5, 2014 at 23:28 | comment | added | W5VO Mod | @NickT That's fine, but this has really gotten out of hand. Let's sort out if the post should exist and then where it should exist first. | |
| May 5, 2014 at 23:27 | comment | added | Nick T | @W5VO aww, I had a list of 30 more abbreviations I found on this random datasheet that I thought the community would love to have. If you can't beat 'em, bury 'em. | |
| May 5, 2014 at 23:25 | comment | added | Nick T | @ScottSeidman I think bounties can interfere with close votes and voting to delete by 10k's. Not immediately relevant, but was annoying on Arqade when someone kept using bounties abusively | |
| May 5, 2014 at 23:24 | comment | added | W5VO Mod | I have locked the question and removed the bounty while we sort this out. | |
| May 5, 2014 at 21:59 | comment | added | Scott Seidman | Someone put a bounty on this. Weird. | |
| May 5, 2014 at 18:46 | answer | added | jippie | timeline score: -2 | |
| May 5, 2014 at 18:16 | answer | added | Adam Davis | timeline score: 7 | |
| May 5, 2014 at 17:09 | comment | added | clabacchio Mod | @jippie I disagree. The abbreviation can be listed with the two meanings in the description. Ultimately, bad/uncommon abbreviations should be removed from the list, hence sorting is not a priority. But make the comment an answer, so it can be voted on | |
| May 5, 2014 at 14:53 | comment | added | W5VO Mod | @Passerby I recognize this is being pedantic, but it is not off topic as much as a complete re-appropriation of the system for something it is poorly suited for, or maybe just Too Broad. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 3:49 | answer | added | Nick T | timeline score: -2 | |
| May 1, 2014 at 0:29 | comment | added | Passerby | The entire point of wiki posts is to prevent these off topic and annoying 100+ questions. It's design to let a single answer be edited by multiple people. OFF TOPIC. | |
| Apr 30, 2014 at 15:04 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackElectronix/status/461521385685549057 | ||
| Apr 30, 2014 at 14:36 | answer | added | Olin Lathrop | timeline score: 0 | |
| Apr 30, 2014 at 14:23 | comment | added | clabacchio Mod | @OlinLathrop indeed, my idea is along the lines of the second comment: one abbreviation per answer, negative score means "likely non accepted" | |
| Apr 30, 2014 at 14:15 | comment | added | Olin Lathrop | OK, thought about it some more. This might work if each answer only listed ONE abbreviation. Then people could vote on each one separately. Acceptable abbreviations would bubble to the top and unacceptable ones to the bottom. It could even be a reference of what you should NOT include in a post, while at the same time explaining what the unacceptable abbrebviations mean. | |
| Apr 30, 2014 at 14:13 | comment | added | Olin Lathrop | I am worried that this is going to turn into a mess where everyone will list their obscure pet abbreviations. The result will then have the opposite effect of intended, since it will give the impression that all the abbreviations are valid and acceptable. | |
| Apr 29, 2014 at 19:44 | history | asked | clabacchioMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |