qid int64 1 74.7M | question stringlengths 12 33.8k | date stringlengths 10 10 | metadata list | response_j stringlengths 0 115k | response_k stringlengths 2 98.3k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
57,510 | I was trying to reorganize my desktop and had a folder dragging into another folder.
When I did this, the folder just got stuck in the toolbar and didn't copy over to the new location...
It's not a clickable button as if it were a favorites in the toolbar itself.
When I try to drag and drop it away from the toolbar, it doesn't work.
I then right clicked and went into "Customize Toolbar" and it wasn't in any of the lists for me to take it off.
Obviously its a 'favorites' feature, but how do I get the thing to get off all my finder toolbars now? | 2012/07/26 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/57510",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/4178/"
] | Well I don't know if this is what you mean, but I accidentally dragged a folder into the Finder, and when I removed it a question mark appeared.
How to delete an accidentally-dragged-in folder in the Finder toolbar:
Just hold `Command ⌘` and drag the folder out of the Finder window and whoosh it's gone. | right click on the item and remove from sidebar is there. |
57,510 | I was trying to reorganize my desktop and had a folder dragging into another folder.
When I did this, the folder just got stuck in the toolbar and didn't copy over to the new location...
It's not a clickable button as if it were a favorites in the toolbar itself.
When I try to drag and drop it away from the toolbar, it doesn't work.
I then right clicked and went into "Customize Toolbar" and it wasn't in any of the lists for me to take it off.
Obviously its a 'favorites' feature, but how do I get the thing to get off all my finder toolbars now? | 2012/07/26 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/57510",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/4178/"
] | Had the same issue with a folder that got stuck in my sidebar, with no right-click option displaying. I tried removing preference files, etc.
Hold `⌘ cmd` and click and drag the icon away from the toolbar. | right click on the item and remove from sidebar is there. |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | In my experience, waiters will offer complimentary things differently than non-complimentary things. For example:
>
> Can I get you started with something to drink?
>
>
>
This requires further feedback from you, which will usually involve reviewing the drink menu or knowing what you want (and thus understanding it costs something).
>
> Would you like some chips and salsa to start off?
>
>
>
This is a yes or no question, which suggests it's being offered to you rather than suggested.
This isn't to say that a waiter couldn't say :
>
> How about we get you started with some of our world famous jalapeno cheddar poppers?
>
>
>
Which aren't free, but in such cases, there is an implicit understanding that the customer will know it's not complimentary. Not because the customer is expected to know, but because if it was too ambiguous, enough people would say yes and upon discovering at the end of the meal that the item wasn't free would be some level of angry or upset, which would translate into complaints or bad reviews or lower tips, which would translate to that waiter not suggesting menu appetizers as though they might be complimentary.
In the US, it's generally safe to assume that water is free, and some item that is cuisine appropriate for the restaurant (chips at a Mexican restaurant, bread at an Italian restaurant, etc). So much so that they often don't ask. So some amount of experience can lead your understanding of whether an item is likely complimentary. If you're in a steakhouse and they ask if you'd like to start with some fried cheese sticks, and you've never had that offered to you at any other steakhouse, odds are good it isn't complimentary.
In any culture, I would assume that something is either *usually* complimentary or it usually isn't. Based on those cultural norms, you shouldn't be afraid to assume something is complimentary if it usually is. On the other hand, if you live in a culture where it is completely arbitrary whether one restaurant offers something as complimentary and other one doesn't, so that it is never safe to assume (which would be a bit ridiculous, but hey, I don't want to judge anyone's culture), then there is almost certainly a culturally-acceptable way of asking whether the offered item is complimentary or not. If the custom in that culture is to say "will that be free?" then you shouldn't worry about seeming stingy, since it is the agreed-upon way of asking. If the custom is to say "how much will that be?" then that's the best way to go. Point being, anyone's first line of defense in such a situation is to rely on previous experience, rather than panic about coming across as stingy or greedy or inconsiderate. Rather than asking "how to ask without looking stingy", perhaps the question should be: "how do most people in xyz culture handle this situation?" Try to learn the customs, rather than imagining a perceived slight.
Per your "house-made garlic bread and taro chips" situation, that sounds like weird customer service. I wouldn't expect it to be free either, and wouldn't hesitate to ask "oh is that free?" since bread is often free but fancy bread might not be. He should have said "would you like some of our *complimentary* fancy ass garlic bread" so as to avoid that ambiguity.
Furthermore, the fact that they ran out 20 minutes later makes it sound nonstandard. Who offers free things but doesn't make enough for all the customers? If it is some special perk they offer to customers lucky enough to come in when it is on hand, it should definitely be emphasized that it's complimentary.
And as for your colleagues being disappointed, that sucks. But people get disappointed all the time, so it's almost unavoidable that you will eventually disappoint someone for silly reasons, even if you try to do everything just right. Also, they might have just been disappointed that they didn't get bread, not that you didn't ask for it.
Asking if it's on the menu is clever, but if your default is to say no because you're worried it might not be complimentary, I suggest relaxing that instinct a bit and assume 90% of the time a waiter offers something specific at the start of the service, it's complimentary. Asking "I don't see water on the menu" every time is going to get exhausting and will seem a bit strange to many waiters. | I'm going to disagree with the basis of the question. That is, **I do not believe one looks stingy by asking more information before making a decision on whether or not you'd like to be provided something that is offered.**
Here's how I would handle the interaction in a culture where food is offered upon seating, but not always complimentary:
Premise:
>
> Waiter: Would you like some bread to start?
>
>
> You: Is the bread complimentary, or will there be a charge?
>
>
>
Result 1:
>
> Waiter: The bread is complimentary.
>
>
> You: Sure, I'll have some bread.
>
>
>
Result 2:
>
> Waiter: The bread is a dollar for a serving.
>
>
> You: I think I'll pass.
>
>
>
There is nothing stingy about not wanting to spend money on something that you do not believe is worth the cost. An example of what I *would* consider stingy is below:
Result 2 alternative:
>
> Waiter: The bread is a dollar for a serving.
>
>
> You: Hmm, I would like some bread, but perhaps not a whole serving. Is it possible to get half of a serving for half the price?
>
>
> |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> Is that extra, or included?
>
>
>
It's a way to inquire about pricing while not actually saying any specific word that is heavily financial in nature.
Or, simply, "How much is that?" By inquiring about the cost, you can be delighted if you find out its free.
If it's more than what you want, just note, "No thanks, I'll pass." | >
> How can I clarify tactfully?
>
>
>
I‘d suggest TOOGAM‘s first suggestion and still simplify it:
>
> Is this extra?
>
>
>
or, for that matter...
>
> Is this included?
>
>
>
I live in Central Europe and realized that for some years, an increasing number of restaurants started using sales tactics with offering small foods etc. without specifying if they would be billed.
These tactics play exactly on customer’s shame of looking stingy to increase sales. I think this is unethical, and I don‘t like that.
Therefore, I strongly recommend taking that small risk and ask:
1. If it turns out to be part of a sales tactic (=not for free but offered as if), asking is never stinginess but countering manipulation.
2. taking a small risk every day on purpose will reduce feelings of social awkwardness by habituation. |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> How can I clarify tactfully?
>
>
>
I‘d suggest TOOGAM‘s first suggestion and still simplify it:
>
> Is this extra?
>
>
>
or, for that matter...
>
> Is this included?
>
>
>
I live in Central Europe and realized that for some years, an increasing number of restaurants started using sales tactics with offering small foods etc. without specifying if they would be billed.
These tactics play exactly on customer’s shame of looking stingy to increase sales. I think this is unethical, and I don‘t like that.
Therefore, I strongly recommend taking that small risk and ask:
1. If it turns out to be part of a sales tactic (=not for free but offered as if), asking is never stinginess but countering manipulation.
2. taking a small risk every day on purpose will reduce feelings of social awkwardness by habituation. | Well similar thing happened to me during my stay in the UK. I had ordered for a Fish & Chips, the waiter asked if I would want some peas to go with it. Well I am aware of the up-selling they have to do to boost sales, so I passed. Later on I realized it was included in the meal. So, if you had already ordered and they offer you something on top of it you can politely ask,
>
> You - Does it comes with the meal?
>
>
> Waiter - Yes
>
>
> You - Sure, I'll have some.
>
>
>
Or
>
> Waiter - No
>
>
> You - Thanks, but I think I'll pass.
>
>
> |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | A waiter's job is to inform you of the menu and serve you while you're in their restaurant. Their time is precious so you always want to be careful when causing them more work than they would normally have to do.
When asked if you'd like an extra dish however, there's no shame if you respond with:
>
> That sounds interesting, but what's the price for that? I can't seem to find it on the menu.
>
>
>
You are inquiring about the menu--something that is within their job description to regularly help customers with--and you are taking a very small portion of their time to do so. | You can always ask if this appetizer is on the menu as well. If it is something that comes standard and free it would normally not be on the menu. Or you could say it sounds nice where is this appetizer on the menu? This would prompt as server to talk about it in greater length or to declare that it is not on the menu and it will possibly be free. |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | A waiter's job is to inform you of the menu and serve you while you're in their restaurant. Their time is precious so you always want to be careful when causing them more work than they would normally have to do.
When asked if you'd like an extra dish however, there's no shame if you respond with:
>
> That sounds interesting, but what's the price for that? I can't seem to find it on the menu.
>
>
>
You are inquiring about the menu--something that is within their job description to regularly help customers with--and you are taking a very small portion of their time to do so. | >
> How much is it?
>
>
>
Short and sweet, implies that you're willing to pay if the cost is reasonable. As opposed to "Is it free?" which carries an expectation that it is.
>
> It's $5.
>
>
> Thanks, but I'll pass.
>
>
>
or
>
> It's free/complimentary.
>
>
> Great, by all means! / Awesome, yes please!
>
>
> |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | "Is it free?" => I don't want to spend money => I might be light on tip
"How much?" => I want to pay if it's reasonable => I'm willing to tip
The second question comes across better.
If they're suggesting it, they should know the price, as that would be a common question. So it should be no work for them.
Some restaurants have ridiculous up-charges, so it's reasonable to ask questions if you've never been there before. | In my experience, waiters will offer complimentary things differently than non-complimentary things. For example:
>
> Can I get you started with something to drink?
>
>
>
This requires further feedback from you, which will usually involve reviewing the drink menu or knowing what you want (and thus understanding it costs something).
>
> Would you like some chips and salsa to start off?
>
>
>
This is a yes or no question, which suggests it's being offered to you rather than suggested.
This isn't to say that a waiter couldn't say :
>
> How about we get you started with some of our world famous jalapeno cheddar poppers?
>
>
>
Which aren't free, but in such cases, there is an implicit understanding that the customer will know it's not complimentary. Not because the customer is expected to know, but because if it was too ambiguous, enough people would say yes and upon discovering at the end of the meal that the item wasn't free would be some level of angry or upset, which would translate into complaints or bad reviews or lower tips, which would translate to that waiter not suggesting menu appetizers as though they might be complimentary.
In the US, it's generally safe to assume that water is free, and some item that is cuisine appropriate for the restaurant (chips at a Mexican restaurant, bread at an Italian restaurant, etc). So much so that they often don't ask. So some amount of experience can lead your understanding of whether an item is likely complimentary. If you're in a steakhouse and they ask if you'd like to start with some fried cheese sticks, and you've never had that offered to you at any other steakhouse, odds are good it isn't complimentary.
In any culture, I would assume that something is either *usually* complimentary or it usually isn't. Based on those cultural norms, you shouldn't be afraid to assume something is complimentary if it usually is. On the other hand, if you live in a culture where it is completely arbitrary whether one restaurant offers something as complimentary and other one doesn't, so that it is never safe to assume (which would be a bit ridiculous, but hey, I don't want to judge anyone's culture), then there is almost certainly a culturally-acceptable way of asking whether the offered item is complimentary or not. If the custom in that culture is to say "will that be free?" then you shouldn't worry about seeming stingy, since it is the agreed-upon way of asking. If the custom is to say "how much will that be?" then that's the best way to go. Point being, anyone's first line of defense in such a situation is to rely on previous experience, rather than panic about coming across as stingy or greedy or inconsiderate. Rather than asking "how to ask without looking stingy", perhaps the question should be: "how do most people in xyz culture handle this situation?" Try to learn the customs, rather than imagining a perceived slight.
Per your "house-made garlic bread and taro chips" situation, that sounds like weird customer service. I wouldn't expect it to be free either, and wouldn't hesitate to ask "oh is that free?" since bread is often free but fancy bread might not be. He should have said "would you like some of our *complimentary* fancy ass garlic bread" so as to avoid that ambiguity.
Furthermore, the fact that they ran out 20 minutes later makes it sound nonstandard. Who offers free things but doesn't make enough for all the customers? If it is some special perk they offer to customers lucky enough to come in when it is on hand, it should definitely be emphasized that it's complimentary.
And as for your colleagues being disappointed, that sucks. But people get disappointed all the time, so it's almost unavoidable that you will eventually disappoint someone for silly reasons, even if you try to do everything just right. Also, they might have just been disappointed that they didn't get bread, not that you didn't ask for it.
Asking if it's on the menu is clever, but if your default is to say no because you're worried it might not be complimentary, I suggest relaxing that instinct a bit and assume 90% of the time a waiter offers something specific at the start of the service, it's complimentary. Asking "I don't see water on the menu" every time is going to get exhausting and will seem a bit strange to many waiters. |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | My preferred tactic in these situations is to ask, "Where is that on the menu?". This works in situations where there is a question about price, or dietary restrictions. You don't need to indicate for which reason you are asking. Personally sometimes I ask this question because I want to know price, sometimes because I want to read the description of an item.
Another question that will serve could be, "What's the additional cost?"
My experience with using these questions is limited to the United States. | Well similar thing happened to me during my stay in the UK. I had ordered for a Fish & Chips, the waiter asked if I would want some peas to go with it. Well I am aware of the up-selling they have to do to boost sales, so I passed. Later on I realized it was included in the meal. So, if you had already ordered and they offer you something on top of it you can politely ask,
>
> You - Does it comes with the meal?
>
>
> Waiter - Yes
>
>
> You - Sure, I'll have some.
>
>
>
Or
>
> Waiter - No
>
>
> You - Thanks, but I think I'll pass.
>
>
> |
13,628 | Some waiters offer something (e.g. distilled water; more *amuse-bouches*, *hors d'œuvre* or bread) without disclosing if it's free. How can I clarify tactfully?
I always decline, as I don't know how to ask without being judged. But this flopped yesterday. When I arrived first at a restaurant, I declined the waiter's offer of house-made garlic bread and taro chips. Only when my colleagues arrived later, did they tell me that they were free. We then notified the waiter of our changed answer, but there were no more.
Some tablemates said nothing, but I could feel their disapproval of me and disappointment. | 2018/04/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/13628",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | "Is it free?" => I don't want to spend money => I might be light on tip
"How much?" => I want to pay if it's reasonable => I'm willing to tip
The second question comes across better.
If they're suggesting it, they should know the price, as that would be a common question. So it should be no work for them.
Some restaurants have ridiculous up-charges, so it's reasonable to ask questions if you've never been there before. | >
> How much is it?
>
>
>
Short and sweet, implies that you're willing to pay if the cost is reasonable. As opposed to "Is it free?" which carries an expectation that it is.
>
> It's $5.
>
>
> Thanks, but I'll pass.
>
>
>
or
>
> It's free/complimentary.
>
>
> Great, by all means! / Awesome, yes please!
>
>
> |
238,583 | I've worked in shops where I've implemented Exception Handling into the event log, and into a table in the database.
Each have their merits, of which I can highlight a few based on my experience:
Event Log
* Industry standard location for exceptions (+)
* Ease of logging (+)
* Can log database connection problems here (+)
* Can build report and viewing apps on top of the event log (+)
* Needs to be flushed every so often, if alot is reported there (-)
* Not as extensible as SQL logging [add custom fields like method name in SQL] (-)
SQL/Database
* Can handle large volumes of data (+)
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions (+)
* Single storage location for exception in load balanced environment (+)
* Very customizable (+)
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage (+)
* Different from where typical exceptions are stored (-)
Am I missing any major considerations?
I'm sure that a few of these points are debatable, but I'm curious what has worked best for other teams, and why you feel strongly about the choice. | 2008/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/238583",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/24126/"
] | One thing that needs considering about event logging is that there are products out there which can monitor your servers' event logs (like Microsoft Operations Manager) and intelligently do notification, and gather statistics on their contents.
A "minus" of SQL-based logging is that it adds another layer of dependencies to your application, which may or may not always be acceptable. I've done both in my career. I once or twice even used a MSMQ based message queue to queue log events and empty the queue into a MSSQL database to eliminate the need for my client software to have a connection to the DB. | One note about writing to the event log: that requires certain permissions for your application users that in some environments may be restricted by default.
Where I'm at we do most of our logging to a database, with flat files as backup. It's pretty nice, we can do things like get an RSS feed for an app to watch for a few days when we make a change. |
238,583 | I've worked in shops where I've implemented Exception Handling into the event log, and into a table in the database.
Each have their merits, of which I can highlight a few based on my experience:
Event Log
* Industry standard location for exceptions (+)
* Ease of logging (+)
* Can log database connection problems here (+)
* Can build report and viewing apps on top of the event log (+)
* Needs to be flushed every so often, if alot is reported there (-)
* Not as extensible as SQL logging [add custom fields like method name in SQL] (-)
SQL/Database
* Can handle large volumes of data (+)
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions (+)
* Single storage location for exception in load balanced environment (+)
* Very customizable (+)
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage (+)
* Different from where typical exceptions are stored (-)
Am I missing any major considerations?
I'm sure that a few of these points are debatable, but I'm curious what has worked best for other teams, and why you feel strongly about the choice. | 2008/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/238583",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/24126/"
] | I wouldn't log *straight* to the database. As you say, database issues become tricky to log :)
I would log to the filesystem, and then have a job which bulk-inserts from files to the database. Personally I like having the logs in the database in the log run primarily for the scaling situation - I pretty much assume I'll have more than one machine running, and it's handy to be able to effectively have a combined log. (Each entry should state the machine it comes from, of course.)
Report and viewing apps can be done very easily from a database - there may be fewer log-specialized reporting tools out there at the moment, but pretty much all databases have generalised reporting functionality.
For ease of logging, I'd use a framework like [log4net](http://logging.apache.org/log4net/index.html) which takes a lot of the effort out of it, and is a tried and tested solution. Aside from anything else, that means you can change your output strategy with no code changes. You could even log to both the event log and the database if necessary, or send some logs to one place and some to the other. (I've assumed .NET here, but there are similar logging frameworks for many platforms.) | One note about writing to the event log: that requires certain permissions for your application users that in some environments may be restricted by default.
Where I'm at we do most of our logging to a database, with flat files as backup. It's pretty nice, we can do things like get an RSS feed for an app to watch for a few days when we make a change. |
238,583 | I've worked in shops where I've implemented Exception Handling into the event log, and into a table in the database.
Each have their merits, of which I can highlight a few based on my experience:
Event Log
* Industry standard location for exceptions (+)
* Ease of logging (+)
* Can log database connection problems here (+)
* Can build report and viewing apps on top of the event log (+)
* Needs to be flushed every so often, if alot is reported there (-)
* Not as extensible as SQL logging [add custom fields like method name in SQL] (-)
SQL/Database
* Can handle large volumes of data (+)
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions (+)
* Single storage location for exception in load balanced environment (+)
* Very customizable (+)
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage (+)
* Different from where typical exceptions are stored (-)
Am I missing any major considerations?
I'm sure that a few of these points are debatable, but I'm curious what has worked best for other teams, and why you feel strongly about the choice. | 2008/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/238583",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/24126/"
] | You need to differentiate between logging and tracing. While the lines are a bit fuzzy, I tend to think of logging as "non developer stuff". Things like unhandled exceptions, corrupt files, etc. These are definitely not normal, and should be a very infrequent problem.
Tracing is what a developer is interested in. The stack traces, method parameters, that the web server returned an HTTP Status of 401.3, etc. These are really noisy, and can produce a lot of data in a short amount of time. Normally we have different levels of tracing, to cut back the noise.
For logging in a client app, I think that Event Logs are the way to go (I'd have to double check, but I think ASP.NET Health Monitoring can write to the Event Log as well). Normal users have permissions to write to the event log, as long as you have the Setup (which is installed by an admin anyway) create the event source.
Most of your advantages for Sql logging, while true, aren't applicable to event logging:
* Can handle large volumes of data:
*Do you really have large volumes of unhandled exceptions or other high level failures?*
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions: *A single unhandled exception should bring your app down - it's inherently rate limited. Other interesting events to non developers should be similarly aggregated.*
* Very customizable: *The message in an Event Log is pretty much free text. If you need more info, just point to a text or structured XML or binary file log*
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage: *Reporting is built in with the Event Log Viewer, and notification systems are, either inherent - due to an application crash - or mixed in with other really critical notifications - there's little excuse for missing an Event Log message. For corporate or other networked apps, there's a thousand and 1 different apps that already cull from Event Logs for errors...chances are your sysadmin is already using one.*
For *tracing*, of which the specific details of an exception or errors is a part of, I like flat files - they're easy to maintain, easy to grep, and can be imported into Sql for analysis if I like.
90% of the time, you don't need them and they're set to WARN or ERROR. But, when you do set them to INFO or DEBUG, you'll generate a *ton* of data. An RDBMS has a lot of overhead - for performance (ACID, concurrency, etc.), storage (transaction logs, SCSI RAID-5 drives, etc.), and administration (backups, server maintenance, etc.) - all of which are unnecessary for trace logs. | One note about writing to the event log: that requires certain permissions for your application users that in some environments may be restricted by default.
Where I'm at we do most of our logging to a database, with flat files as backup. It's pretty nice, we can do things like get an RSS feed for an app to watch for a few days when we make a change. |
238,583 | I've worked in shops where I've implemented Exception Handling into the event log, and into a table in the database.
Each have their merits, of which I can highlight a few based on my experience:
Event Log
* Industry standard location for exceptions (+)
* Ease of logging (+)
* Can log database connection problems here (+)
* Can build report and viewing apps on top of the event log (+)
* Needs to be flushed every so often, if alot is reported there (-)
* Not as extensible as SQL logging [add custom fields like method name in SQL] (-)
SQL/Database
* Can handle large volumes of data (+)
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions (+)
* Single storage location for exception in load balanced environment (+)
* Very customizable (+)
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage (+)
* Different from where typical exceptions are stored (-)
Am I missing any major considerations?
I'm sure that a few of these points are debatable, but I'm curious what has worked best for other teams, and why you feel strongly about the choice. | 2008/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/238583",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/24126/"
] | You need to differentiate between logging and tracing. While the lines are a bit fuzzy, I tend to think of logging as "non developer stuff". Things like unhandled exceptions, corrupt files, etc. These are definitely not normal, and should be a very infrequent problem.
Tracing is what a developer is interested in. The stack traces, method parameters, that the web server returned an HTTP Status of 401.3, etc. These are really noisy, and can produce a lot of data in a short amount of time. Normally we have different levels of tracing, to cut back the noise.
For logging in a client app, I think that Event Logs are the way to go (I'd have to double check, but I think ASP.NET Health Monitoring can write to the Event Log as well). Normal users have permissions to write to the event log, as long as you have the Setup (which is installed by an admin anyway) create the event source.
Most of your advantages for Sql logging, while true, aren't applicable to event logging:
* Can handle large volumes of data:
*Do you really have large volumes of unhandled exceptions or other high level failures?*
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions: *A single unhandled exception should bring your app down - it's inherently rate limited. Other interesting events to non developers should be similarly aggregated.*
* Very customizable: *The message in an Event Log is pretty much free text. If you need more info, just point to a text or structured XML or binary file log*
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage: *Reporting is built in with the Event Log Viewer, and notification systems are, either inherent - due to an application crash - or mixed in with other really critical notifications - there's little excuse for missing an Event Log message. For corporate or other networked apps, there's a thousand and 1 different apps that already cull from Event Logs for errors...chances are your sysadmin is already using one.*
For *tracing*, of which the specific details of an exception or errors is a part of, I like flat files - they're easy to maintain, easy to grep, and can be imported into Sql for analysis if I like.
90% of the time, you don't need them and they're set to WARN or ERROR. But, when you do set them to INFO or DEBUG, you'll generate a *ton* of data. An RDBMS has a lot of overhead - for performance (ACID, concurrency, etc.), storage (transaction logs, SCSI RAID-5 drives, etc.), and administration (backups, server maintenance, etc.) - all of which are unnecessary for trace logs. | One thing that needs considering about event logging is that there are products out there which can monitor your servers' event logs (like Microsoft Operations Manager) and intelligently do notification, and gather statistics on their contents.
A "minus" of SQL-based logging is that it adds another layer of dependencies to your application, which may or may not always be acceptable. I've done both in my career. I once or twice even used a MSMQ based message queue to queue log events and empty the queue into a MSSQL database to eliminate the need for my client software to have a connection to the DB. |
238,583 | I've worked in shops where I've implemented Exception Handling into the event log, and into a table in the database.
Each have their merits, of which I can highlight a few based on my experience:
Event Log
* Industry standard location for exceptions (+)
* Ease of logging (+)
* Can log database connection problems here (+)
* Can build report and viewing apps on top of the event log (+)
* Needs to be flushed every so often, if alot is reported there (-)
* Not as extensible as SQL logging [add custom fields like method name in SQL] (-)
SQL/Database
* Can handle large volumes of data (+)
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions (+)
* Single storage location for exception in load balanced environment (+)
* Very customizable (+)
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage (+)
* Different from where typical exceptions are stored (-)
Am I missing any major considerations?
I'm sure that a few of these points are debatable, but I'm curious what has worked best for other teams, and why you feel strongly about the choice. | 2008/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/238583",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/24126/"
] | You need to differentiate between logging and tracing. While the lines are a bit fuzzy, I tend to think of logging as "non developer stuff". Things like unhandled exceptions, corrupt files, etc. These are definitely not normal, and should be a very infrequent problem.
Tracing is what a developer is interested in. The stack traces, method parameters, that the web server returned an HTTP Status of 401.3, etc. These are really noisy, and can produce a lot of data in a short amount of time. Normally we have different levels of tracing, to cut back the noise.
For logging in a client app, I think that Event Logs are the way to go (I'd have to double check, but I think ASP.NET Health Monitoring can write to the Event Log as well). Normal users have permissions to write to the event log, as long as you have the Setup (which is installed by an admin anyway) create the event source.
Most of your advantages for Sql logging, while true, aren't applicable to event logging:
* Can handle large volumes of data:
*Do you really have large volumes of unhandled exceptions or other high level failures?*
* Can handle rapid volume inserts of exceptions: *A single unhandled exception should bring your app down - it's inherently rate limited. Other interesting events to non developers should be similarly aggregated.*
* Very customizable: *The message in an Event Log is pretty much free text. If you need more info, just point to a text or structured XML or binary file log*
* A little easier to build reporting/notification off of SQL storage: *Reporting is built in with the Event Log Viewer, and notification systems are, either inherent - due to an application crash - or mixed in with other really critical notifications - there's little excuse for missing an Event Log message. For corporate or other networked apps, there's a thousand and 1 different apps that already cull from Event Logs for errors...chances are your sysadmin is already using one.*
For *tracing*, of which the specific details of an exception or errors is a part of, I like flat files - they're easy to maintain, easy to grep, and can be imported into Sql for analysis if I like.
90% of the time, you don't need them and they're set to WARN or ERROR. But, when you do set them to INFO or DEBUG, you'll generate a *ton* of data. An RDBMS has a lot of overhead - for performance (ACID, concurrency, etc.), storage (transaction logs, SCSI RAID-5 drives, etc.), and administration (backups, server maintenance, etc.) - all of which are unnecessary for trace logs. | I wouldn't log *straight* to the database. As you say, database issues become tricky to log :)
I would log to the filesystem, and then have a job which bulk-inserts from files to the database. Personally I like having the logs in the database in the log run primarily for the scaling situation - I pretty much assume I'll have more than one machine running, and it's handy to be able to effectively have a combined log. (Each entry should state the machine it comes from, of course.)
Report and viewing apps can be done very easily from a database - there may be fewer log-specialized reporting tools out there at the moment, but pretty much all databases have generalised reporting functionality.
For ease of logging, I'd use a framework like [log4net](http://logging.apache.org/log4net/index.html) which takes a lot of the effort out of it, and is a tried and tested solution. Aside from anything else, that means you can change your output strategy with no code changes. You could even log to both the event log and the database if necessary, or send some logs to one place and some to the other. (I've assumed .NET here, but there are similar logging frameworks for many platforms.) |
711,019 | How do I configure my datagrid to use paging such that it won't pull ALL the rows from the database, but rather only the rows for the current page.
BTW, should I be using a datagrid still or is there a newer control? | 2009/04/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/711019",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/39677/"
] | Brainstorming:
* Hard-code a domain-check into the dll's main function and compile a new dll for each customer (ok, not scalable)
* Distribute a license file with the dll that stores the valid domain for the dll, encrypted. Have your DLL check for the file, decrypt the contents, and fail if the file is missing or the current domain doesn't match the encrypted domain.
* Have the DLL "phone-home" to one of your servers over encrypted line asking your server whether the current domain the dll is running in is acceptable. Your server responds 'yes' or 'no' and the DLL either runs or doesn't. | The DLL could look at the incoming request's host header. |
56,749,073 | I'm working on a VR game in Unreal Engine 4 using Blueprints.
I want to calculate the (yaw) angle the user needs to turn his/her gun (whose direction is determined via the position of the motion controllers) in order to be pointing towards the target.
I figure this might be the way to do it:
* Subtract the location of the target from the location of the gun
* Get the yaw component of that as a vector pointing from the gun as origin
* Subtract the current yaw of the gun direction from that yaw component to get the yaw angle the user needs to turn to get to the target
Except I'm not quite sure how to execute that. I've been experimenting (as seen in the screenshot below), but not doing the correct operations. Any thoughts?
Thanks!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7mxkB.png) | 2019/06/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/56749073",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/217463/"
] | A more elegant and robust solution is to use the gun actor's world transform to calculate the relative rotation to the object:
1. Get the gun's world transform. The rotation should point in the forward vector direction. You can make a transform with its location and forward vector, but likely the component transform will work.
2. Use the operation [InverseTransformLocation](https://api.unrealengine.com/INT/BlueprintAPI/Math/Transform/InverseTransformLocation/index.html) on this transform, with the target's location as other parameter. This creates a vector that is the target's location in the gun's space
3. Get the rotation of this vector with the [RotationFromXVector](https://api.unrealengine.com/INT/BlueprintAPI/Math/Rotator/RotationFromXVector/index.html) operation.
This rotator contains the correct yaw, but also pitch. And it will also work when your objects are rotated in space arbitrarily, or your objects become children of even more actors. | This is how I do it:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CKYyZ.png)
'Find look at rotation' is a function from 'Kismet Math Library' (unreal math library). It finds *world rotation* for an object at Start location to point at Target location. |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | Late answer, but it could be useful. I developed an online tool to extract main colors from an image, an visualize their relations and proportions on a (HSL) color wheel :
<http://www.geotests.net/couleurs/v2>
It could be used to examine a map, considered pleasant, and retrieve its colors.
Another tool, to create gradient palettes :
<https://www.geotests.net/couleurs/gradients_inflex.html> | It is not only for ArcGIS, but you can use [colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) for that.
 |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | You can download the [ColorBrewer styles](http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=14403) for use in ArcMap through the ArcScripts site | Late answer, but it could be useful. I developed an online tool to extract main colors from an image, an visualize their relations and proportions on a (HSL) color wheel :
<http://www.geotests.net/couleurs/v2>
It could be used to examine a map, considered pleasant, and retrieve its colors.
Another tool, to create gradient palettes :
<https://www.geotests.net/couleurs/gradients_inflex.html> |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | For thematic maps, the handy [Colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) has an ArcGIS plug-in, [ColorTool](http://gis.cancer.gov/tools/colortool/)
The [built-in styles](http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?TopicName=Organizing_style_contents) also contain lots of professionally selected color palettes and ramps that you could repurpose for other needs. To look at the styles without having to dink around in ArcMap, you can view them in [PDF form](http://resources.arcgis.com/content/product-documentation?fa=viewDoc&PID=66&MetaID=854) | Late answer, but it could be useful. I developed an online tool to extract main colors from an image, an visualize their relations and proportions on a (HSL) color wheel :
<http://www.geotests.net/couleurs/v2>
It could be used to examine a map, considered pleasant, and retrieve its colors.
Another tool, to create gradient palettes :
<https://www.geotests.net/couleurs/gradients_inflex.html> |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | For thematic maps, the handy [Colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) has an ArcGIS plug-in, [ColorTool](http://gis.cancer.gov/tools/colortool/)
The [built-in styles](http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?TopicName=Organizing_style_contents) also contain lots of professionally selected color palettes and ramps that you could repurpose for other needs. To look at the styles without having to dink around in ArcMap, you can view them in [PDF form](http://resources.arcgis.com/content/product-documentation?fa=viewDoc&PID=66&MetaID=854) | It is not only for ArcGIS, but you can use [colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) for that.
 |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | You can download the [ColorBrewer styles](http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=14403) for use in ArcMap through the ArcScripts site | It is not only for ArcGIS, but you can use [colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) for that.
 |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | For thematic maps, the handy [Colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) has an ArcGIS plug-in, [ColorTool](http://gis.cancer.gov/tools/colortool/)
The [built-in styles](http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?TopicName=Organizing_style_contents) also contain lots of professionally selected color palettes and ramps that you could repurpose for other needs. To look at the styles without having to dink around in ArcMap, you can view them in [PDF form](http://resources.arcgis.com/content/product-documentation?fa=viewDoc&PID=66&MetaID=854) | Have you seen the [map templates](http://resources.esri.com/maptemplates/)? |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | Late answer, but it could be useful. I developed an online tool to extract main colors from an image, an visualize their relations and proportions on a (HSL) color wheel :
<http://www.geotests.net/couleurs/v2>
It could be used to examine a map, considered pleasant, and retrieve its colors.
Another tool, to create gradient palettes :
<https://www.geotests.net/couleurs/gradients_inflex.html> | Have you seen the [map templates](http://resources.esri.com/maptemplates/)? |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | For thematic maps, the handy [Colorbrewer](http://colorbrewer2.org/) has an ArcGIS plug-in, [ColorTool](http://gis.cancer.gov/tools/colortool/)
The [built-in styles](http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?TopicName=Organizing_style_contents) also contain lots of professionally selected color palettes and ramps that you could repurpose for other needs. To look at the styles without having to dink around in ArcMap, you can view them in [PDF form](http://resources.arcgis.com/content/product-documentation?fa=viewDoc&PID=66&MetaID=854) | <http://kuler.adobe.com/> is another source of predifined color palettes. |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | Late answer, but it could be useful. I developed an online tool to extract main colors from an image, an visualize their relations and proportions on a (HSL) color wheel :
<http://www.geotests.net/couleurs/v2>
It could be used to examine a map, considered pleasant, and retrieve its colors.
Another tool, to create gradient palettes :
<https://www.geotests.net/couleurs/gradients_inflex.html> | <http://kuler.adobe.com/> is another source of predifined color palettes. |
1,660 | Are there any convenient sources of color palettes to use in ArcGIS software while producing maps? | 2010/09/02 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1660",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/107/"
] | You can download the [ColorBrewer styles](http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=14403) for use in ArcMap through the ArcScripts site | Have you seen the [map templates](http://resources.esri.com/maptemplates/)? |
50,134,503 | I keep hearing so many people get weary when I say "It was built in PHP". "Oh, PHP is so easy to hack." "PHP isn't secure". I remember a long time ago this was an issue, but I feel as the years have passed PHP has become more secure as a language? Can anyone (2018) prove me wrong?
Can someone list potential security risks associated with PHP 7?
We're developing a cryptocurrency exchange in PHP at the moment, too. | 2018/05/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/50134503",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2897963/"
] | Not PHP itself is insecure, it's the apps that are created by the coders that can be insecure.
Basic PHP is very simple to learn. This is a good thing, not a bad thing. This mean that a lot of people can code in PHP, without spending too much effort on learning.
If people abuse of this characteristic to write bad code, it’s because they are bad coders. | If you are doing coding in simple core php then it can be insecure, but if you are using any framework or using OOPS reduces insecurity and enhances security in your webapp. |
50,134,503 | I keep hearing so many people get weary when I say "It was built in PHP". "Oh, PHP is so easy to hack." "PHP isn't secure". I remember a long time ago this was an issue, but I feel as the years have passed PHP has become more secure as a language? Can anyone (2018) prove me wrong?
Can someone list potential security risks associated with PHP 7?
We're developing a cryptocurrency exchange in PHP at the moment, too. | 2018/05/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/50134503",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2897963/"
] | As some of the other answers and comments have pointed out, any language can be used to develop applications that are insecure, or are more secure than others, by means of input validation and sanitization, secure password management and other factors, depending on the scale, scope, and purpose of the application.
In terms of the underlying language itself, there are a few resources helpful to determine language and implementation vulnerabilities and how (if possible) to mitigate them.
OWASP ([Open Web Application Security Project](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/About_The_Open_Web_Application_Security_Project)) provides a "[cheat sheet](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/PHP_Security_Cheat_Sheet)" on best practices for securing and developing PHP applications.
For specific vulnerabilities, you can look at [CVEs](https://cve.mitre.org/) on NIST's website such as <https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-5711>, or [this website](https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-74/product_id-128/PHP-PHP.html) that lists and details the CVEs. | Not PHP itself is insecure, it's the apps that are created by the coders that can be insecure.
Basic PHP is very simple to learn. This is a good thing, not a bad thing. This mean that a lot of people can code in PHP, without spending too much effort on learning.
If people abuse of this characteristic to write bad code, it’s because they are bad coders. |
50,134,503 | I keep hearing so many people get weary when I say "It was built in PHP". "Oh, PHP is so easy to hack." "PHP isn't secure". I remember a long time ago this was an issue, but I feel as the years have passed PHP has become more secure as a language? Can anyone (2018) prove me wrong?
Can someone list potential security risks associated with PHP 7?
We're developing a cryptocurrency exchange in PHP at the moment, too. | 2018/05/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/50134503",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2897963/"
] | As some of the other answers and comments have pointed out, any language can be used to develop applications that are insecure, or are more secure than others, by means of input validation and sanitization, secure password management and other factors, depending on the scale, scope, and purpose of the application.
In terms of the underlying language itself, there are a few resources helpful to determine language and implementation vulnerabilities and how (if possible) to mitigate them.
OWASP ([Open Web Application Security Project](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/About_The_Open_Web_Application_Security_Project)) provides a "[cheat sheet](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/PHP_Security_Cheat_Sheet)" on best practices for securing and developing PHP applications.
For specific vulnerabilities, you can look at [CVEs](https://cve.mitre.org/) on NIST's website such as <https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-5711>, or [this website](https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-74/product_id-128/PHP-PHP.html) that lists and details the CVEs. | If you are doing coding in simple core php then it can be insecure, but if you are using any framework or using OOPS reduces insecurity and enhances security in your webapp. |
361,002 | For fun, I'm trying to write one of my son's favorite board games as a piece of software. Eventually I expect to build a WPF UI on top of it, but right now I'm building the machine that models the games and its rules.
As I do this, I keep seeing problems that I think are common to many board games, and perhaps others have already solved them better than I will.
(Note that AI to play the game, and patterns around high performance are not interesting to me.)
So far my patterns are:
* Several immutable types representing entities in the game box, e.g. dice, checkers, cards, a board, spaces on the board, money, etc.
* An object for each player, which contains the players resources (e.g. money, score), their name, etc.
* An object that represents the state of the game: the players, who's turn it is, the layout of the peices on the board, etc.
* A state machine that manages the turn sequence. For example, many games have a small pre-game where each player rolls to see who goes first; that's the start state. When a player's turn starts, first they roll, then they move, then they have to dance in place, then other players guess what breed of chicken they are, then they receive points.
Is there some prior art I can take advantage of?
**EDIT:** One thing I realized recently is that game state can be split in to two categories:
* **Game artifact state**. "I have $10" or "my left hand is on blue".
* **Game sequence state**. "I have rolled doubles twice; the next one puts me in jail". A state machine may make sense here.
**EDIT:** What I'm really looking for here is the *best* way to implement multiplayer turn-based games like Chess or Scrabble or Monopoly. I'm sure I could create such a game by just working through it start to finish, but, like other Design Patterns, there are probably some ways to make things go much more smoothly that aren't obvious without careful study. That's what I'm hoping for. | 2008/12/11 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/361002",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/5314/"
] | Much of the materials I can find online are lists of published references. The publications section of [Game Design Patterns](http://www.gamedesignpatterns.org/) has links to PDF versions of the articles and theses. Many of these look like academic papers like [Design Patterns for Games](http://www.exciton.cs.rice.edu/research/SIGCSE02/DP4Games.pdf). There is also at least one book available from Amazon, [Patterns in Game Design](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1584503548). | >
> Is there some prior art I can take advantage of?
>
>
>
If your question ain't language- or platform-specific. then I would recommend that you consider AOP Patterns for State, Memento, Command, etc.
Whats the .NET answer to AOP???
Also try to find some cool websites such as <http://www.chessbin.com> |
361,002 | For fun, I'm trying to write one of my son's favorite board games as a piece of software. Eventually I expect to build a WPF UI on top of it, but right now I'm building the machine that models the games and its rules.
As I do this, I keep seeing problems that I think are common to many board games, and perhaps others have already solved them better than I will.
(Note that AI to play the game, and patterns around high performance are not interesting to me.)
So far my patterns are:
* Several immutable types representing entities in the game box, e.g. dice, checkers, cards, a board, spaces on the board, money, etc.
* An object for each player, which contains the players resources (e.g. money, score), their name, etc.
* An object that represents the state of the game: the players, who's turn it is, the layout of the peices on the board, etc.
* A state machine that manages the turn sequence. For example, many games have a small pre-game where each player rolls to see who goes first; that's the start state. When a player's turn starts, first they roll, then they move, then they have to dance in place, then other players guess what breed of chicken they are, then they receive points.
Is there some prior art I can take advantage of?
**EDIT:** One thing I realized recently is that game state can be split in to two categories:
* **Game artifact state**. "I have $10" or "my left hand is on blue".
* **Game sequence state**. "I have rolled doubles twice; the next one puts me in jail". A state machine may make sense here.
**EDIT:** What I'm really looking for here is the *best* way to implement multiplayer turn-based games like Chess or Scrabble or Monopoly. I'm sure I could create such a game by just working through it start to finish, but, like other Design Patterns, there are probably some ways to make things go much more smoothly that aren't obvious without careful study. That's what I'm hoping for. | 2008/12/11 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/361002",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/5314/"
] | The basic structure of your game engine uses the [State Pattern](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_pattern). The items of your game box are [singletons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern) of various classes. The structure of each state may use [Strategy Pattern](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_pattern) or [the Template Method](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_method_pattern).
A [Factory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_method_pattern) is used to create the players which are inserted into a list of players, another singleton. The GUI will keep watch on the Game Engine by using the [Observer pattern](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_pattern) and interact with this by using one of several Command object created using the [Command Pattern](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_pattern). The use of Observer and Command can be used with in the context of a [Passive View](http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaDev/PassiveScreen.html) But just about any MVP/MVC pattern could be used depending on your preferences. When you save the game you need to grab a [memento](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memento_pattern) of it's current state
I recommending looking over some of the patterns on this [site](http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaDev/) and see if any of them grab you as a starting point. Again the heart of your game board is going to be a state machine. Most games will represented by two states pre-game/setup and the actual game. But you can had more states if the game you are modelling has several distinct modes of play. States don't have to be sequential for example the wargame Axis & Battles has a battle board the players can use to resolve battles. So there are three states pre-game, main board, battle board with the game continually switching between the main board and battle board. Of course the turn sequence can also be represented by a state machine. | >
> Is there some prior art I can take advantage of?
>
>
>
If your question ain't language- or platform-specific. then I would recommend that you consider AOP Patterns for State, Memento, Command, etc.
Whats the .NET answer to AOP???
Also try to find some cool websites such as <http://www.chessbin.com> |
475,327 | I have 2 different domains with their respective certificates, but both are hosted on one single IP. problem is that when i enable one, then the SSL certificate is enabled for both sites. like SSL for site A is applied to site A and B as well. but if i disable the certificate of site A, then the SSL of site B remains on the site B and works properly. how to resolve this issue.
i have enabled name based virtual hosting and tried many tweaks, noting works so far. | 2013/02/04 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/475327",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/100156/"
] | Name based virtual hosting doesn't work for SSL, as the Host header is part of the encrypted payload - Apache doesn't know which certificate to present.
You need a second IP for the second certificate. | You need a dedicated IP address per SSL certificate. That is a requirement. |
475,327 | I have 2 different domains with their respective certificates, but both are hosted on one single IP. problem is that when i enable one, then the SSL certificate is enabled for both sites. like SSL for site A is applied to site A and B as well. but if i disable the certificate of site A, then the SSL of site B remains on the site B and works properly. how to resolve this issue.
i have enabled name based virtual hosting and tried many tweaks, noting works so far. | 2013/02/04 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/475327",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/100156/"
] | Name based virtual hosting doesn't work for SSL, as the Host header is part of the encrypted payload - Apache doesn't know which certificate to present.
You need a second IP for the second certificate. | You need a SAN/UCC cert which allows multiple domains on 1 ip address. I've had your configuration before on an Amazon AWS instance and at the time they only allocated 1 ip address per server. I still have 5 sites with different domain names using a single SSL.com [Subject Alternative Name cert](http://www.ssl.com/certificates/ucc) on that server. |
475,327 | I have 2 different domains with their respective certificates, but both are hosted on one single IP. problem is that when i enable one, then the SSL certificate is enabled for both sites. like SSL for site A is applied to site A and B as well. but if i disable the certificate of site A, then the SSL of site B remains on the site B and works properly. how to resolve this issue.
i have enabled name based virtual hosting and tried many tweaks, noting works so far. | 2013/02/04 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/475327",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/100156/"
] | You need a dedicated IP address per SSL certificate. That is a requirement. | You need a SAN/UCC cert which allows multiple domains on 1 ip address. I've had your configuration before on an Amazon AWS instance and at the time they only allocated 1 ip address per server. I still have 5 sites with different domain names using a single SSL.com [Subject Alternative Name cert](http://www.ssl.com/certificates/ucc) on that server. |
7,694,338 | I'm loading a URL from my own web site into a UIWebView in an iPhone app. This page has the Facebook Comments social plugin enabled. It was working beautifully two weeks ago, using the mobile friendly version of Facebook comments. However, a week ago, something changed on Facebook's end. I'm no longer seeing the mobile friendly version, and it has that awful "Comment Using" drop down that lets you log in via Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail, which is clearly meant for a desktop/mouse setup.
Does anyone know of a way to get the mobile friendly markup in this scenario?
I already tried using Facebook's iOS SDK for reading & posting comments, but your Facebook app has to be "white listed" before you're able to post comments using the Graph API. It turns out that only ONE app is white listed...something called "Causes." Ugh.
Thanks! | 2011/10/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/7694338",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/289206/"
] | Ah ha! Facebook **finally** fixed this problem:
<https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-media/bringing-facebook-comments-to-mobile/306485919386904> | Have you updated your facebook API, as it has been changed from 1st October.
Check Out this [link](http://developers.facebook.com/roadmap/) |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | >
> Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
>
>
>
Do you remember when you were an undergraduate (or even worse, high school student) reading your first research paper? If your experience was anything like mine then you might have had thoughts such as "I have no idea what this means" or "I understand this paper up to exactly this point since I have seen that equation in my textbook, but I don't understand anything beyond that at all", or even "[Why do authors use such complicated sentences instead of plain English?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/85286/why-do-researchers-sometimes-use-extremely-complicated-english-sentences-to-conv)"
Have some mercy on people less expert than you - you can skip past things that are obvious much faster than they can learn things which are not obvious. | When papers "state the obvious" it often appears weird and unhelpful, as you noticed. Yet this awkwardness does not come from "stating the obvious" but rather from immediately thereafter assuming the non-obvious. Let's consider your first example, along with the sentences that follow it:
>
> Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep. Conditions associated with worsening severity of events include supine body position and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep. The therapeutic response to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is usually complete.
>
>
>
>
> Central sleep apnea (CSA) syndrome is characterised by recurrent episodes of apnea in the absence of upper airway obstruction during sleep which can occur in association with alveolar hypoventilation (i.e., hypercapnic), or it can be normocapnic or hypocapnic.
>
>
>
Merely three sentences after defining sleep apnea, the paper assumes the reader already understands "alveolar hypoventilation". How many people don't know what apnea is, but do know what "alveolar hypoventilation" is?
Introductions should be funnel-shaped, starting out broad and then *gradually* narrowing. They should provide prerequisite knowledge that a typical reader might not know. But when introductions narrow sharply, they seem faintly ridiculous. And when introductions provide prerequisite knowledge that most high school graduates know, but fail to provide prerequisite knowledge that first-year graduate students might not know, they are rather unhelpful. It is this unfortunately common practice that makes you (and many other readers of academic literature) doubt the value of introductions. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | Understanding a paper is not a binary. I challenge the assumption of the question that someone who doesn't already know the "obvious" facts won't understand a good part of the study.
I'm no medic, and before reading I knew very little about sleep apnea ("it's some problem that makes people sleep badly and snore I think...") but I opened one of the papers you link, and after just a quick scan I have a reasonable idea what they were trying to do and what they found. If pressed I could probably offer a summary that could go in a funding request or something.
I don't know the context of the study in the wider field. I wouldn't spot any shortcomings, aside from perhaps botched statistical analysis. I would only have a basic idea about how to compare it with another study. And certainly, nobody is going to rely on me to review it. However, all that said, it's not hieroglyphs to me, and I learnt something reading it.
In addition, if I found I wanted to know a bit more, the author has given me some terms that I could search to fill out my knowledge further. So that was helpful.
As mentioned in the other answers, these statements can serve to ensure other expert readers know what basic definitions you are using. But they do also expand the group of people who may read the paper and make some sense of it. You don't need to understand every last detail of a paper to get something useful from it. What with most of us being publicly funded, perhaps we have a duty to take some steps to make research accessible, and basic definitions are easy to provide. | This is a very old problem. There is ancient Chinese wisdom about it.
*"In explaining anything to anyone, one should start with that which is absolutely clear."*
It's a bit hopeless, since another equally old Chinese wisdom says:
*"It is not possible to have anyone completely understanding what it is you mean, without you telling him what it is you believe in."*
Add to that the physical fact that all language is a lie by definition and every use of it religious and you will have read the useless basics of this answer.
The truth is, these basics are usually added by demand. Papers aren't just written, but also published and the publisher has objectives of his or her own. Also the particular discipline a paper relates to may demand it, like in medicine or law. It is actually quite seldom a writer himself who wishes to start a scientific paper with the basics.
Another reason to include basics, is to define the school of thought that the paper follows. Basics, even if commonly accepted, aren't always 100% certain. This makes mentioning the assumptions a paper is based upon unavoidable.
Then there is the fear of being misunderstood and the desperation of not knowing what level of understanding basics to expect of the readers.
Local custom or rule in the discipline may also account for the inclusion of basic information. Sometimes it's just the way the writer learned to write. Believe it or not, some people were actually taught to write as if they are explaining something to a child.
Last but not least, there is the fact that those who write papers, as much as they may be experts in their field, are seldom experts in writing.
As a subscriber to "Nature" I did a lot of interdisciplinary scientific reading over the years. Over time I have come to appreciate that where the point of a story doesn't always get me to understanding its extend, this seemingly ballast information sometimes reveals the true nature of the core message of a paper. It's doesn't just contain 'the' basics, but rather the writers basics, which I by occasion have found to be quite revealing. I prefer a paper with too much basic information over a paper in which I have to fill in the blanks any time.
In general, a well written scientific paper is like a roller coaster ride. You have to climb to the top first, which may not be the most exiting part, but the higher the climb, the wilder the ride. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | >
> Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
>
>
>
Do you remember when you were an undergraduate (or even worse, high school student) reading your first research paper? If your experience was anything like mine then you might have had thoughts such as "I have no idea what this means" or "I understand this paper up to exactly this point since I have seen that equation in my textbook, but I don't understand anything beyond that at all", or even "[Why do authors use such complicated sentences instead of plain English?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/85286/why-do-researchers-sometimes-use-extremely-complicated-english-sentences-to-conv)"
Have some mercy on people less expert than you - you can skip past things that are obvious much faster than they can learn things which are not obvious. | The definitions of medical terms (and terms in other disciplines) are reasonably likely to change over time, so even if every reader *today* knows the meaning of a term, it does not follow that every reader in the future will know the same meaning.
That said, any paper (or really any verbal explanation of anything) should include some statements of things the explainee already knows, because the way humans learn is by associating new ideas with things we already understand, and so an explanation needs to tell you which old ideas the new idea is (or should be) associated with.
Consider a mathematical proof: these often contain a statement of something the reader already knows (e.g. a definition or theorem), because although the reader knows it already, the reader doesn't know *a priori* that that particular definition or theorem is the one that justifies some later step in the proof. And that's not just true in mathematics; every paper is practically an argument for why its conclusion is correct, and arguments should state their premises, even if the premises are well-known facts, so that the reader can follow the reasoning of the argument. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | Understanding a paper is not a binary. I challenge the assumption of the question that someone who doesn't already know the "obvious" facts won't understand a good part of the study.
I'm no medic, and before reading I knew very little about sleep apnea ("it's some problem that makes people sleep badly and snore I think...") but I opened one of the papers you link, and after just a quick scan I have a reasonable idea what they were trying to do and what they found. If pressed I could probably offer a summary that could go in a funding request or something.
I don't know the context of the study in the wider field. I wouldn't spot any shortcomings, aside from perhaps botched statistical analysis. I would only have a basic idea about how to compare it with another study. And certainly, nobody is going to rely on me to review it. However, all that said, it's not hieroglyphs to me, and I learnt something reading it.
In addition, if I found I wanted to know a bit more, the author has given me some terms that I could search to fill out my knowledge further. So that was helpful.
As mentioned in the other answers, these statements can serve to ensure other expert readers know what basic definitions you are using. But they do also expand the group of people who may read the paper and make some sense of it. You don't need to understand every last detail of a paper to get something useful from it. What with most of us being publicly funded, perhaps we have a duty to take some steps to make research accessible, and basic definitions are easy to provide. | Journals can be odd things. Often, they publish papers in very narrow areas that can still be of interest to their wider general readership. This is particularly true of clinical literature, but it comes up everywhere.
Other times, especially where a paper takes common knowledge in one field and presents it to a broad readership in an adjacent area, basic explanations are quite necessary. For example, while apparently apnea impacts circulation in a way that it might interest the general readership of Circulation Research (one of your examples comes from there) it would be a mistake to assume that the general readership knows what sleep apnea is.
I suggest that what you call "obvious" may not be obvious when you consider a wider readership than what you apparently assume to be the case, necessitating more basic material than what would be required by an expert in a narrow area. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | Understanding a paper is not a binary. I challenge the assumption of the question that someone who doesn't already know the "obvious" facts won't understand a good part of the study.
I'm no medic, and before reading I knew very little about sleep apnea ("it's some problem that makes people sleep badly and snore I think...") but I opened one of the papers you link, and after just a quick scan I have a reasonable idea what they were trying to do and what they found. If pressed I could probably offer a summary that could go in a funding request or something.
I don't know the context of the study in the wider field. I wouldn't spot any shortcomings, aside from perhaps botched statistical analysis. I would only have a basic idea about how to compare it with another study. And certainly, nobody is going to rely on me to review it. However, all that said, it's not hieroglyphs to me, and I learnt something reading it.
In addition, if I found I wanted to know a bit more, the author has given me some terms that I could search to fill out my knowledge further. So that was helpful.
As mentioned in the other answers, these statements can serve to ensure other expert readers know what basic definitions you are using. But they do also expand the group of people who may read the paper and make some sense of it. You don't need to understand every last detail of a paper to get something useful from it. What with most of us being publicly funded, perhaps we have a duty to take some steps to make research accessible, and basic definitions are easy to provide. | I see this from a slightly different perspective than many of the other responses (from my cursory glance at them). The three examples you chose each has a slightly different definition. That's important. Though it seems they are repeating the same thing, they actually aren't. Why is this important? Because the exact definition may be the determining factor in what the study is trying to resolve. As mentioned by another, they are not defining "sleep." The kick is, they COULD have defined sleep if they had a specific reason for the type/kind of "sleep" they were concentrating on for the purposes of the study.
Consider this: Write a paper regarding something in your field of work or study. Write it as you wish papers were written, skipping all the "common sense" terms and concepts. Now, give that paper to someone who may have a general idea about the topic, but no where near what you have. Or better, give it to someone who has NO idea. Get their reaction. Did they understand it? Did they want/need foundational information to help with comprehension? |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | **That's what an introduction is.** A good introduction will (1) start with the basics that everyone knows, (2) present the problem that we're trying to solve, and then (3) set up the rest of the paper (how this is done may be field dependent -- it could be a summary, or just an overview of the paper's organization).
These introductions should be concise, and they are not necessarily intended to be comprehensible to a general audience. For example, your first article defines central sleep apnea as follows:
>
> Central sleep apnea (CSA) syndrome is characterised by recurrent episodes of apnea in the absence of upper airway obstruction during sleep which can occur in association with alveolar hypoventilation (i.e., hypercapnic), or it can be normocapnic or hypocapnic
>
>
>
Anyone interested in this study likely knows what CSA is, but seeing this definition stated gives me a good orientation -- I now know exactly what we're talking about and am ready to "drill down" to the specific things this study considered. It's also helpful to see the definition stated using the same language that the paper is going to use. But note that this definition is not really intended for non-experts: "normocapnic" and "hypocapnic" are not words that most people know.
Next you say:
>
> *For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is....Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others?*
>
>
>
I disagree with your premise. Sure, physicists probably don't define electricity just like the doctors in the above study didn't define sleep. But a well-written introduction does start with "the basics that everyone knows." For example, I pulled up the first link from the first open-access electronics journal that google returned, which led me to [this](https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/11/3/480) article, the introduction of which begins:
>
> The increasing global energy demand over the last 20 years means that electric energy is gaining more and more importance in our daily lives [1–3]. Furthermore, when
> taking into account the imminent emergence of the electric vehicle (EV) [4–6], there is no
> doubt that the electric energy sector will be of great importance in the immediate future.
> Inside the electric energy sector, the power converter is a key device whose design and
> behavior directly affect its efficiency, its cost, and the size of the final solution
>
>
>
All of this is definitely "the basics that everyone knows" -- in fact, this seems even more accessible than the sleep apnea introduction.
One last comment: not all introductions are well-written, so occasionally, your observations can be explained by "this author did a bad job." One example that comes to mind is papers about neural networks (especially deep convolutional neural networks, and especially in journals that are not "about machine learning"). Giving a clear explanation of what these neural networks are and how they work is *very* difficult, and most authors do not want to allocate many lines to the task. So, the result is exactly as you say: they give a thoroughly useless explanation which is incomprehensible if you don't already know how such networks work, and not needed if you do already know. One must make judicious choices in deciding what material to present in the paper versus what material should be left to references. | Journals can be odd things. Often, they publish papers in very narrow areas that can still be of interest to their wider general readership. This is particularly true of clinical literature, but it comes up everywhere.
Other times, especially where a paper takes common knowledge in one field and presents it to a broad readership in an adjacent area, basic explanations are quite necessary. For example, while apparently apnea impacts circulation in a way that it might interest the general readership of Circulation Research (one of your examples comes from there) it would be a mistake to assume that the general readership knows what sleep apnea is.
I suggest that what you call "obvious" may not be obvious when you consider a wider readership than what you apparently assume to be the case, necessitating more basic material than what would be required by an expert in a narrow area. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | *Pro forma* introductions to a research topic that are plagiarized from other papers are highly tedious and, as you suggest, a real turn-off towards such papers' findings. I think that journal editors ought to advise such authors to use their own words, write them clearly and avoid overuse of the jargon of the field: this much at least would show that they thought it through rather than simply mealy-mouthed it.
But introductions *per se* are vital for research papers. The reader's attention must be focussed on the direction of the author's own research work and its purpose in the context of existing knowledge in this field.
When other researchers are overviewing a long list of papers, a well-written intro is far more useful to them than the balder 'bombshell' abstract. Perforce this involves going back to first principles of the science/field. But it is *where* the author goes from these that is important - and *how* they go from there. While many will just follow the 'orthodox' path (and not question its many unstated assumptions) beaten by previous publications and enlarge it little further, others will be more radical and/or more thorough - and hopefully find a more fruitful vista. | Journals can be odd things. Often, they publish papers in very narrow areas that can still be of interest to their wider general readership. This is particularly true of clinical literature, but it comes up everywhere.
Other times, especially where a paper takes common knowledge in one field and presents it to a broad readership in an adjacent area, basic explanations are quite necessary. For example, while apparently apnea impacts circulation in a way that it might interest the general readership of Circulation Research (one of your examples comes from there) it would be a mistake to assume that the general readership knows what sleep apnea is.
I suggest that what you call "obvious" may not be obvious when you consider a wider readership than what you apparently assume to be the case, necessitating more basic material than what would be required by an expert in a narrow area. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | Simply, it is that it is both standard practice and wise to define the technical terms you intend to use in a paper so that there is less chance of misinterpretation. What is obvious to you will not be obvious to others and, you need to admit, that in come cases, what you think is "obvious" is actually wrong.
Each element of the medical term you describe is essential in some way and should be stated. Alternatively, such terminology can be introduced by citing another work in which the definitions occur.
To do otherwise is probably malpractice.
---
I'll also note that some things are "common knowledge", such as most things taught in an undergraduate curriculum and certainly anything taught in most secondary schools. These things don't don't normally need definition when used as the definitions are both standard and easily available to anyone. There are exceptional cases, of course, in which even the definition of electricity needs to be specified, such as when it is used in some esoteric (non common knowledge) way. Scholars are familiar with the concept of common knowledge because such doesn't normally need referencing or citation in a paper. | *Pro forma* introductions to a research topic that are plagiarized from other papers are highly tedious and, as you suggest, a real turn-off towards such papers' findings. I think that journal editors ought to advise such authors to use their own words, write them clearly and avoid overuse of the jargon of the field: this much at least would show that they thought it through rather than simply mealy-mouthed it.
But introductions *per se* are vital for research papers. The reader's attention must be focussed on the direction of the author's own research work and its purpose in the context of existing knowledge in this field.
When other researchers are overviewing a long list of papers, a well-written intro is far more useful to them than the balder 'bombshell' abstract. Perforce this involves going back to first principles of the science/field. But it is *where* the author goes from these that is important - and *how* they go from there. While many will just follow the 'orthodox' path (and not question its many unstated assumptions) beaten by previous publications and enlarge it little further, others will be more radical and/or more thorough - and hopefully find a more fruitful vista. |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | The definitions of medical terms (and terms in other disciplines) are reasonably likely to change over time, so even if every reader *today* knows the meaning of a term, it does not follow that every reader in the future will know the same meaning.
That said, any paper (or really any verbal explanation of anything) should include some statements of things the explainee already knows, because the way humans learn is by associating new ideas with things we already understand, and so an explanation needs to tell you which old ideas the new idea is (or should be) associated with.
Consider a mathematical proof: these often contain a statement of something the reader already knows (e.g. a definition or theorem), because although the reader knows it already, the reader doesn't know *a priori* that that particular definition or theorem is the one that justifies some later step in the proof. And that's not just true in mathematics; every paper is practically an argument for why its conclusion is correct, and arguments should state their premises, even if the premises are well-known facts, so that the reader can follow the reasoning of the argument. | I see this from a slightly different perspective than many of the other responses (from my cursory glance at them). The three examples you chose each has a slightly different definition. That's important. Though it seems they are repeating the same thing, they actually aren't. Why is this important? Because the exact definition may be the determining factor in what the study is trying to resolve. As mentioned by another, they are not defining "sleep." The kick is, they COULD have defined sleep if they had a specific reason for the type/kind of "sleep" they were concentrating on for the purposes of the study.
Consider this: Write a paper regarding something in your field of work or study. Write it as you wish papers were written, skipping all the "common sense" terms and concepts. Now, give that paper to someone who may have a general idea about the topic, but no where near what you have. Or better, give it to someone who has NO idea. Get their reaction. Did they understand it? Did they want/need foundational information to help with comprehension? |
182,060 | There is a pattern I keep seeing and I'm very curious about the reason behind it.
Let's say you're going to read a paper on astronomy: In order to understand it, you need to know some basics about the topic. Similarly, a paper on electronics will require some basic knowledge of the topic if the reader wants to have any chance of understanding it.
But I keep seeing research where, at the introduction the prerequisite knowledge is defined, as if the reader was unaware.
At first, I was assuming that it might be similar to legal documents where you will define the terms when it comes to their meaning, coverage and exclusion, but the more documents I read, the more I realize this is not the case.
Let me take some simple examples here, about sleep apnea:
>
> [(1)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1978327/) Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH) is characterized by episodes of complete or partial upper airway obstruction during sleep.
>
>
> [(2)](https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316359) OSA occurs when there is obstruction of the upper airway causing cessation of airflow
>
>
> [(3)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Badran-2/publication/262686778_Insights_into_obstructive_sleep_apnea_research/links/0c96053875b2d09aed000000/Insights-into-obstructive-sleep-apnea-research.pdf) ... is characterized by momentary
> cessations in breathing (apnea) or significant reductions in breath-
> ing amplitude (hypopnea) caused by an obstructed or collapsed
> upper airway
>
>
>
I can find many many links exhibiting this and it seems a lot more prevalent in medical literature.
For example, when reading a paper about technology, you don't find a paragraph starting with "electricity results from the existence of charged particles...": there is an assumption you know what electricity is.
Content space, and the reader's time, are wasted to define the basics even though the contents are usually incomprehensible to anyone that wouldn't know the basics anyways.
Can anyone explain why this seems to happen more in some disciplines than others? | 2022/02/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98730/"
] | *Pro forma* introductions to a research topic that are plagiarized from other papers are highly tedious and, as you suggest, a real turn-off towards such papers' findings. I think that journal editors ought to advise such authors to use their own words, write them clearly and avoid overuse of the jargon of the field: this much at least would show that they thought it through rather than simply mealy-mouthed it.
But introductions *per se* are vital for research papers. The reader's attention must be focussed on the direction of the author's own research work and its purpose in the context of existing knowledge in this field.
When other researchers are overviewing a long list of papers, a well-written intro is far more useful to them than the balder 'bombshell' abstract. Perforce this involves going back to first principles of the science/field. But it is *where* the author goes from these that is important - and *how* they go from there. While many will just follow the 'orthodox' path (and not question its many unstated assumptions) beaten by previous publications and enlarge it little further, others will be more radical and/or more thorough - and hopefully find a more fruitful vista. | This is a very old problem. There is ancient Chinese wisdom about it.
*"In explaining anything to anyone, one should start with that which is absolutely clear."*
It's a bit hopeless, since another equally old Chinese wisdom says:
*"It is not possible to have anyone completely understanding what it is you mean, without you telling him what it is you believe in."*
Add to that the physical fact that all language is a lie by definition and every use of it religious and you will have read the useless basics of this answer.
The truth is, these basics are usually added by demand. Papers aren't just written, but also published and the publisher has objectives of his or her own. Also the particular discipline a paper relates to may demand it, like in medicine or law. It is actually quite seldom a writer himself who wishes to start a scientific paper with the basics.
Another reason to include basics, is to define the school of thought that the paper follows. Basics, even if commonly accepted, aren't always 100% certain. This makes mentioning the assumptions a paper is based upon unavoidable.
Then there is the fear of being misunderstood and the desperation of not knowing what level of understanding basics to expect of the readers.
Local custom or rule in the discipline may also account for the inclusion of basic information. Sometimes it's just the way the writer learned to write. Believe it or not, some people were actually taught to write as if they are explaining something to a child.
Last but not least, there is the fact that those who write papers, as much as they may be experts in their field, are seldom experts in writing.
As a subscriber to "Nature" I did a lot of interdisciplinary scientific reading over the years. Over time I have come to appreciate that where the point of a story doesn't always get me to understanding its extend, this seemingly ballast information sometimes reveals the true nature of the core message of a paper. It's doesn't just contain 'the' basics, but rather the writers basics, which I by occasion have found to be quite revealing. I prefer a paper with too much basic information over a paper in which I have to fill in the blanks any time.
In general, a well written scientific paper is like a roller coaster ride. You have to climb to the top first, which may not be the most exiting part, but the higher the climb, the wilder the ride. |
182,698 | I uninstalled Mount & Blade: Warband and it said the game would be in my games library to reinstall at a later time, but the game is not there.
Does anyone know how to get the game to reinstall with out me buying the game again? | 2014/08/31 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/182698",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/86421/"
] | Unfortunately, if this is the case, there's not much we can do to help you (beyond verifying what is going on). This is a matter for Steam Support.
To submit a ticket, click "Help", then "Steam Support". Once you register a Steam Support account, send a ticket to Valve and they'll look into it. Try to find a copy of the receipt you received by email when you bought the game and include it in the ticket. | At the top left, make sure the filter is set to "Games" and not "Installed".
 |
88,688 | There's a baseball sized hole in the aluminum siding on the back of my house left by the previous owners that's causing some water damage on the interior wall. The houses siding is old and beat up so I don't care about making this repair look good I just want to eliminate the elements, and birds, from getting inside it. Would it be sufficient to tape over it with some white gorilla tape (my house is white) or should I really be going a more legitimate route? | 2016/04/15 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/88688",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/34594/"
] | Since you don't particularly care about looks, all you will need to do is create a patch out of aluminum sheet metal and attach it to the siding.
Start with a sheet of aluminum. A good source from this is from a roll of drip edge. Cut a square or rectangular piece out using tin snips, and make it slightly larger than the hole. You would want to make it large enough to cover it completely, and still have room to attach it.
Once the piece is cut, you should paint it to protect it, and have it blend in with the color of your siding. It doesn't need to be an exact match, but the closer, the better.
Attach the patch to the siding using 1/8" aluminum pop-rivets. You also should use a thin bead of caulk around the hole to keep it weather tight. Once the patch is installed, you should also apply one more coat of paint to cover up the heads of the rivets. | Tape won't be enough. Critters will get through it pretty easily.
I would cut a small patch from aluminum flashing, or preferably a spare piece of siding, and stick it on with epoxy (caulk will work too, but it won't be quite as durable as epoxy.) |
88,688 | There's a baseball sized hole in the aluminum siding on the back of my house left by the previous owners that's causing some water damage on the interior wall. The houses siding is old and beat up so I don't care about making this repair look good I just want to eliminate the elements, and birds, from getting inside it. Would it be sufficient to tape over it with some white gorilla tape (my house is white) or should I really be going a more legitimate route? | 2016/04/15 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/88688",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/34594/"
] | Since you don't particularly care about looks, all you will need to do is create a patch out of aluminum sheet metal and attach it to the siding.
Start with a sheet of aluminum. A good source from this is from a roll of drip edge. Cut a square or rectangular piece out using tin snips, and make it slightly larger than the hole. You would want to make it large enough to cover it completely, and still have room to attach it.
Once the piece is cut, you should paint it to protect it, and have it blend in with the color of your siding. It doesn't need to be an exact match, but the closer, the better.
Attach the patch to the siding using 1/8" aluminum pop-rivets. You also should use a thin bead of caulk around the hole to keep it weather tight. Once the patch is installed, you should also apply one more coat of paint to cover up the heads of the rivets. | Aluminum foil tape will work in a pinch. It sticks better than cloth-based duct or gorilla tape. |
88,688 | There's a baseball sized hole in the aluminum siding on the back of my house left by the previous owners that's causing some water damage on the interior wall. The houses siding is old and beat up so I don't care about making this repair look good I just want to eliminate the elements, and birds, from getting inside it. Would it be sufficient to tape over it with some white gorilla tape (my house is white) or should I really be going a more legitimate route? | 2016/04/15 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/88688",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/34594/"
] | Since you don't particularly care about looks, all you will need to do is create a patch out of aluminum sheet metal and attach it to the siding.
Start with a sheet of aluminum. A good source from this is from a roll of drip edge. Cut a square or rectangular piece out using tin snips, and make it slightly larger than the hole. You would want to make it large enough to cover it completely, and still have room to attach it.
Once the piece is cut, you should paint it to protect it, and have it blend in with the color of your siding. It doesn't need to be an exact match, but the closer, the better.
Attach the patch to the siding using 1/8" aluminum pop-rivets. You also should use a thin bead of caulk around the hole to keep it weather tight. Once the patch is installed, you should also apply one more coat of paint to cover up the heads of the rivets. | You can purchase [trim coil](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Amerimax-Home-Products-24-in-x-50-ft-Bright-White-Trim-Coil-69124182/202091135) although it's a bit much to pay for a small piece. Ask neighbors or relatives if they have some lying around; if they've ever used it for an addition, or replacing windows or window trim, chances are they have some left over. You can also go to a big box store and look around in the siding area, you can get aluminum meant for flashing in both coils and loose pieces, or even purchase a single piece of siding to cut up if you like.
Cut a square big enough to cover the hole and apply caulk around the hole before putting the metal over it. Drive some white gutter screws through the new piece into the siding and you're good to go. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | Let them, so long as it makes coherent sense in the world.
In a sandbox game, the players are just one group in a larger world. Your job is to run the world, which means you're going to be fairly reactive to what the players are doing. If they want to hunt dire boars, let them. Stopping them would require a good reason here. Maybe at some point you throw a quest hook at them for something that gives wealth, but if they don't take it and are content farming animals you really shouldn't do a lot about it. (Now the local Druids may not take too kindly to it...)
If they're just farming lower level stuff, it depends. If they're taking out Goblins that are attacking some local town, then fine. They won't get much XP or much wealth, but they're happy, right? If it's trade caravans, most likely the authorities would be displeased with that sort of brigand activity. Trade is the lifeblood of commerce, and people with significant resources are going to react unkindly.
Yes, this means that sometimes the party may be way off on the wealth chart. In a sandbox game, that's one of the things that can happen. You may need to adjust encounters to deal with it at times, or if you're really serious about the sandbox thing, the party may just one day encounter something they have no realistic way to defeat due to their time wasting.
Running away is a valid encounter result. | You should certainly let them do what they like
===============================================
After all, that is the point of a sandbox game. Railroading is bad in general but particularly for a sandbox.
Besides, the most lucrative business in *Dungeons & Dragons* is adventuring. If you look at the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, even astronomical DCs still result in paltry income compared to adventuring.
Players usually want both money and XP, and usually they won’t go too far for one if it means losing too much of the other, *especially* if it’s slow even for the one. Sure, after a while goblins are worth zero XP but nonzero wealth, but the wealth will still be extremely small for that level. Few players are going to want to keep doing that over and over just for the small amount of money available. As a result, you rarely need to fix much, and it’s definitely ok to have moderate, or even significant deviations from WBL, so long as it’s temporary.
The problem with WBL is when deviations accumulate across several levels and significant differences become the new normal. That can take a lot of work to judge. But being a level ahead or behind for now just means taking a little more care and looking for opportunities to rebalance things.
But if you’re clever, you can fix wealth
========================================
Maybe dire boar pelts are really valuable, or there's a bounty on a particularly dangerous one that’s been causing problems. Perhaps their predation on caravans in the area prompts them to get better guards, making the players work for that wealth. Or maybe their activities get noticed and they have trouble selling the stolen goods, so they have to find a fence and this winds up embroiling them in mob politics (ripe for roleplayong XP). Or they walk away from the money if they don’t want to get involved. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | Let them, so long as it makes coherent sense in the world.
In a sandbox game, the players are just one group in a larger world. Your job is to run the world, which means you're going to be fairly reactive to what the players are doing. If they want to hunt dire boars, let them. Stopping them would require a good reason here. Maybe at some point you throw a quest hook at them for something that gives wealth, but if they don't take it and are content farming animals you really shouldn't do a lot about it. (Now the local Druids may not take too kindly to it...)
If they're just farming lower level stuff, it depends. If they're taking out Goblins that are attacking some local town, then fine. They won't get much XP or much wealth, but they're happy, right? If it's trade caravans, most likely the authorities would be displeased with that sort of brigand activity. Trade is the lifeblood of commerce, and people with significant resources are going to react unkindly.
Yes, this means that sometimes the party may be way off on the wealth chart. In a sandbox game, that's one of the things that can happen. You may need to adjust encounters to deal with it at times, or if you're really serious about the sandbox thing, the party may just one day encounter something they have no realistic way to defeat due to their time wasting.
Running away is a valid encounter result. | The idea of a sandbox campaign is to let the players set the course of the campaign. If they decide to go after Smaug the terrible at first level then so be it.
The referee's creativity comes into play not in prepared content but in deciding and developing the consequences of the player's actions. Because mostly likely a group is playing a game for entertainment and not a true simulation. The referee doesn't have to always pick the most probable consequence but rather look at the list of likely consequences and pick the most interesting that leads to more opportunities for adventure.
For example you gave two situations.
**Dire Boars**
We know from reading the Monster Manual that Dire Boars are ill-tempered animals that are dangerous. Players that had considerable success in killing large numbers of Dire Boars will likely earn the gratitude and respect of the surrounding villages. So when the elders of Eastwick ran into trouble with humaniods operating out of a ruined castle near their village, they sent a messenger to the party asking them for help and offering a sizable reward as well as some land.
Or
Despite being an important party of the region's background the players ignored the fact they were hunting in a Royal Forest protected the King's Rangers. Now several months the Rangers discovered who was responsible but luckily due to some friends the party was tipped off and fled. Now wanted fugitives they will have to be careful for the next couple of session until they are able to reach and cross over the kingdom's borders.
**Bandits Robbing Humaniods**
The Sheriff of Eastmarch has had enough of the increase number of successful robberies on the Royal highways. He has authorized Sir Fenwick of Appledore, a Knight of Renown, to hunt down and bring the brigands to justice. The entire march is abuzz about it and Badger, the party's fence, warns them at their next meeting.
ShadowCat the leader of the Company of Honorable Men, the thieves guild of Castle Blackmarsh, has heard of the success of a new group of brigands. He sends Luven Lightfingers out to fine them and to extend an offer for them to join the Honorable Men. In return for a small tithe, he will guaranteeing their territory as well as put them in contact with those of Blackmarsh's merchant willing to invest their money with no questions asked. However if refused he will bring the full weight of the Honorable Men down on the party.
All of these possible consequences stem naturally from the prior actions of the characters. Developed in a way that gives them further opportunities for adventure. While being hunted doesn't sound like a reward it is an adventure and if the challenge is overcome then it will lead to other types of opportunities. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | Let them, so long as it makes coherent sense in the world.
In a sandbox game, the players are just one group in a larger world. Your job is to run the world, which means you're going to be fairly reactive to what the players are doing. If they want to hunt dire boars, let them. Stopping them would require a good reason here. Maybe at some point you throw a quest hook at them for something that gives wealth, but if they don't take it and are content farming animals you really shouldn't do a lot about it. (Now the local Druids may not take too kindly to it...)
If they're just farming lower level stuff, it depends. If they're taking out Goblins that are attacking some local town, then fine. They won't get much XP or much wealth, but they're happy, right? If it's trade caravans, most likely the authorities would be displeased with that sort of brigand activity. Trade is the lifeblood of commerce, and people with significant resources are going to react unkindly.
Yes, this means that sometimes the party may be way off on the wealth chart. In a sandbox game, that's one of the things that can happen. You may need to adjust encounters to deal with it at times, or if you're really serious about the sandbox thing, the party may just one day encounter something they have no realistic way to defeat due to their time wasting.
Running away is a valid encounter result. | **No, you should not.**
Fixing party wealth means the players don't need to strive or explore in order to find good stuff, because Fate (you) will engineer events so that they're taken care of. That's the opposite of the essential nature of a sandbox campaign.
But what happens if they have pitiful gear for their level? Or conversely, have gear that's too good for their level? Well, nothing special happens. It's a sandbox, so you're not matching encounter CR to the party anyway, so having the "right" gear for their level is irrelevant. They will go places they think they can handle with the gear and abilities they have, and run away from situations that are too tough (if they're at all looking out for their necks) – that is how a sandbox handles encounter balance. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | Let them, so long as it makes coherent sense in the world.
In a sandbox game, the players are just one group in a larger world. Your job is to run the world, which means you're going to be fairly reactive to what the players are doing. If they want to hunt dire boars, let them. Stopping them would require a good reason here. Maybe at some point you throw a quest hook at them for something that gives wealth, but if they don't take it and are content farming animals you really shouldn't do a lot about it. (Now the local Druids may not take too kindly to it...)
If they're just farming lower level stuff, it depends. If they're taking out Goblins that are attacking some local town, then fine. They won't get much XP or much wealth, but they're happy, right? If it's trade caravans, most likely the authorities would be displeased with that sort of brigand activity. Trade is the lifeblood of commerce, and people with significant resources are going to react unkindly.
Yes, this means that sometimes the party may be way off on the wealth chart. In a sandbox game, that's one of the things that can happen. You may need to adjust encounters to deal with it at times, or if you're really serious about the sandbox thing, the party may just one day encounter something they have no realistic way to defeat due to their time wasting.
Running away is a valid encounter result. | **Probably**
If the party is just getting XP rewards without picking up their normal wealth by level treasure, then you're shifting class balance as the party levels up. I'd say a low wealth game disproportionately favors divine casters (since they gain access to *everything* just by leveling up) and really hurts the gear-based characters (a fighter or rogue without the coin for swords with more pluses or things to Use Magic Device on are sad representatives of classes that are already weak in comparison). A poor wizard is a weaker wizard, so if your party had one that was running away with the game, being poor might bring him more in line with the rest of the party.
Really your whole decision process should be asking yourself, "If they had more money, what would they do?" and then act to bring them up to their WBL or not based on whether that sounds like more fun. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | You should certainly let them do what they like
===============================================
After all, that is the point of a sandbox game. Railroading is bad in general but particularly for a sandbox.
Besides, the most lucrative business in *Dungeons & Dragons* is adventuring. If you look at the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, even astronomical DCs still result in paltry income compared to adventuring.
Players usually want both money and XP, and usually they won’t go too far for one if it means losing too much of the other, *especially* if it’s slow even for the one. Sure, after a while goblins are worth zero XP but nonzero wealth, but the wealth will still be extremely small for that level. Few players are going to want to keep doing that over and over just for the small amount of money available. As a result, you rarely need to fix much, and it’s definitely ok to have moderate, or even significant deviations from WBL, so long as it’s temporary.
The problem with WBL is when deviations accumulate across several levels and significant differences become the new normal. That can take a lot of work to judge. But being a level ahead or behind for now just means taking a little more care and looking for opportunities to rebalance things.
But if you’re clever, you can fix wealth
========================================
Maybe dire boar pelts are really valuable, or there's a bounty on a particularly dangerous one that’s been causing problems. Perhaps their predation on caravans in the area prompts them to get better guards, making the players work for that wealth. Or maybe their activities get noticed and they have trouble selling the stolen goods, so they have to find a fence and this winds up embroiling them in mob politics (ripe for roleplayong XP). Or they walk away from the money if they don’t want to get involved. | The idea of a sandbox campaign is to let the players set the course of the campaign. If they decide to go after Smaug the terrible at first level then so be it.
The referee's creativity comes into play not in prepared content but in deciding and developing the consequences of the player's actions. Because mostly likely a group is playing a game for entertainment and not a true simulation. The referee doesn't have to always pick the most probable consequence but rather look at the list of likely consequences and pick the most interesting that leads to more opportunities for adventure.
For example you gave two situations.
**Dire Boars**
We know from reading the Monster Manual that Dire Boars are ill-tempered animals that are dangerous. Players that had considerable success in killing large numbers of Dire Boars will likely earn the gratitude and respect of the surrounding villages. So when the elders of Eastwick ran into trouble with humaniods operating out of a ruined castle near their village, they sent a messenger to the party asking them for help and offering a sizable reward as well as some land.
Or
Despite being an important party of the region's background the players ignored the fact they were hunting in a Royal Forest protected the King's Rangers. Now several months the Rangers discovered who was responsible but luckily due to some friends the party was tipped off and fled. Now wanted fugitives they will have to be careful for the next couple of session until they are able to reach and cross over the kingdom's borders.
**Bandits Robbing Humaniods**
The Sheriff of Eastmarch has had enough of the increase number of successful robberies on the Royal highways. He has authorized Sir Fenwick of Appledore, a Knight of Renown, to hunt down and bring the brigands to justice. The entire march is abuzz about it and Badger, the party's fence, warns them at their next meeting.
ShadowCat the leader of the Company of Honorable Men, the thieves guild of Castle Blackmarsh, has heard of the success of a new group of brigands. He sends Luven Lightfingers out to fine them and to extend an offer for them to join the Honorable Men. In return for a small tithe, he will guaranteeing their territory as well as put them in contact with those of Blackmarsh's merchant willing to invest their money with no questions asked. However if refused he will bring the full weight of the Honorable Men down on the party.
All of these possible consequences stem naturally from the prior actions of the characters. Developed in a way that gives them further opportunities for adventure. While being hunted doesn't sound like a reward it is an adventure and if the challenge is overcome then it will lead to other types of opportunities. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | You should certainly let them do what they like
===============================================
After all, that is the point of a sandbox game. Railroading is bad in general but particularly for a sandbox.
Besides, the most lucrative business in *Dungeons & Dragons* is adventuring. If you look at the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, even astronomical DCs still result in paltry income compared to adventuring.
Players usually want both money and XP, and usually they won’t go too far for one if it means losing too much of the other, *especially* if it’s slow even for the one. Sure, after a while goblins are worth zero XP but nonzero wealth, but the wealth will still be extremely small for that level. Few players are going to want to keep doing that over and over just for the small amount of money available. As a result, you rarely need to fix much, and it’s definitely ok to have moderate, or even significant deviations from WBL, so long as it’s temporary.
The problem with WBL is when deviations accumulate across several levels and significant differences become the new normal. That can take a lot of work to judge. But being a level ahead or behind for now just means taking a little more care and looking for opportunities to rebalance things.
But if you’re clever, you can fix wealth
========================================
Maybe dire boar pelts are really valuable, or there's a bounty on a particularly dangerous one that’s been causing problems. Perhaps their predation on caravans in the area prompts them to get better guards, making the players work for that wealth. Or maybe their activities get noticed and they have trouble selling the stolen goods, so they have to find a fence and this winds up embroiling them in mob politics (ripe for roleplayong XP). Or they walk away from the money if they don’t want to get involved. | **No, you should not.**
Fixing party wealth means the players don't need to strive or explore in order to find good stuff, because Fate (you) will engineer events so that they're taken care of. That's the opposite of the essential nature of a sandbox campaign.
But what happens if they have pitiful gear for their level? Or conversely, have gear that's too good for their level? Well, nothing special happens. It's a sandbox, so you're not matching encounter CR to the party anyway, so having the "right" gear for their level is irrelevant. They will go places they think they can handle with the gear and abilities they have, and run away from situations that are too tough (if they're at all looking out for their necks) – that is how a sandbox handles encounter balance. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | You should certainly let them do what they like
===============================================
After all, that is the point of a sandbox game. Railroading is bad in general but particularly for a sandbox.
Besides, the most lucrative business in *Dungeons & Dragons* is adventuring. If you look at the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, even astronomical DCs still result in paltry income compared to adventuring.
Players usually want both money and XP, and usually they won’t go too far for one if it means losing too much of the other, *especially* if it’s slow even for the one. Sure, after a while goblins are worth zero XP but nonzero wealth, but the wealth will still be extremely small for that level. Few players are going to want to keep doing that over and over just for the small amount of money available. As a result, you rarely need to fix much, and it’s definitely ok to have moderate, or even significant deviations from WBL, so long as it’s temporary.
The problem with WBL is when deviations accumulate across several levels and significant differences become the new normal. That can take a lot of work to judge. But being a level ahead or behind for now just means taking a little more care and looking for opportunities to rebalance things.
But if you’re clever, you can fix wealth
========================================
Maybe dire boar pelts are really valuable, or there's a bounty on a particularly dangerous one that’s been causing problems. Perhaps their predation on caravans in the area prompts them to get better guards, making the players work for that wealth. Or maybe their activities get noticed and they have trouble selling the stolen goods, so they have to find a fence and this winds up embroiling them in mob politics (ripe for roleplayong XP). Or they walk away from the money if they don’t want to get involved. | **Probably**
If the party is just getting XP rewards without picking up their normal wealth by level treasure, then you're shifting class balance as the party levels up. I'd say a low wealth game disproportionately favors divine casters (since they gain access to *everything* just by leveling up) and really hurts the gear-based characters (a fighter or rogue without the coin for swords with more pluses or things to Use Magic Device on are sad representatives of classes that are already weak in comparison). A poor wizard is a weaker wizard, so if your party had one that was running away with the game, being poor might bring him more in line with the rest of the party.
Really your whole decision process should be asking yourself, "If they had more money, what would they do?" and then act to bring them up to their WBL or not based on whether that sounds like more fun. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | **No, you should not.**
Fixing party wealth means the players don't need to strive or explore in order to find good stuff, because Fate (you) will engineer events so that they're taken care of. That's the opposite of the essential nature of a sandbox campaign.
But what happens if they have pitiful gear for their level? Or conversely, have gear that's too good for their level? Well, nothing special happens. It's a sandbox, so you're not matching encounter CR to the party anyway, so having the "right" gear for their level is irrelevant. They will go places they think they can handle with the gear and abilities they have, and run away from situations that are too tough (if they're at all looking out for their necks) – that is how a sandbox handles encounter balance. | The idea of a sandbox campaign is to let the players set the course of the campaign. If they decide to go after Smaug the terrible at first level then so be it.
The referee's creativity comes into play not in prepared content but in deciding and developing the consequences of the player's actions. Because mostly likely a group is playing a game for entertainment and not a true simulation. The referee doesn't have to always pick the most probable consequence but rather look at the list of likely consequences and pick the most interesting that leads to more opportunities for adventure.
For example you gave two situations.
**Dire Boars**
We know from reading the Monster Manual that Dire Boars are ill-tempered animals that are dangerous. Players that had considerable success in killing large numbers of Dire Boars will likely earn the gratitude and respect of the surrounding villages. So when the elders of Eastwick ran into trouble with humaniods operating out of a ruined castle near their village, they sent a messenger to the party asking them for help and offering a sizable reward as well as some land.
Or
Despite being an important party of the region's background the players ignored the fact they were hunting in a Royal Forest protected the King's Rangers. Now several months the Rangers discovered who was responsible but luckily due to some friends the party was tipped off and fled. Now wanted fugitives they will have to be careful for the next couple of session until they are able to reach and cross over the kingdom's borders.
**Bandits Robbing Humaniods**
The Sheriff of Eastmarch has had enough of the increase number of successful robberies on the Royal highways. He has authorized Sir Fenwick of Appledore, a Knight of Renown, to hunt down and bring the brigands to justice. The entire march is abuzz about it and Badger, the party's fence, warns them at their next meeting.
ShadowCat the leader of the Company of Honorable Men, the thieves guild of Castle Blackmarsh, has heard of the success of a new group of brigands. He sends Luven Lightfingers out to fine them and to extend an offer for them to join the Honorable Men. In return for a small tithe, he will guaranteeing their territory as well as put them in contact with those of Blackmarsh's merchant willing to invest their money with no questions asked. However if refused he will bring the full weight of the Honorable Men down on the party.
All of these possible consequences stem naturally from the prior actions of the characters. Developed in a way that gives them further opportunities for adventure. While being hunted doesn't sound like a reward it is an adventure and if the challenge is overcome then it will lead to other types of opportunities. |
21,968 | This question is inspired by [this WBL question](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21940/is-there-a-reason-to-ignore-adjust-wealth-by-level-chart). The consensus seems to be that WBL is important. But in a sandbox game , where the course of action is determined by the players, what should be DM's reaction to party actively pursuing one or the other?
Let's say the party is going to hunt dire boars etc. and does just that, gaining XP, but no wealth. OR, perhaps, the same party goes to rob humanoids well below appropriate CR (trade caravans included), gaining little XP, but some wealth. Would you just let them? Or would you try to actively counter-balance their way?
Our game is going to be similar to [Ben Robbin's West Marches experiment](http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/). We will be getting an environment but no victory condition. Since I'm not the DM I was looking for something to suggest "what can I expect?" rather than "what should I do?". | 2013/02/07 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/21968",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/5621/"
] | **No, you should not.**
Fixing party wealth means the players don't need to strive or explore in order to find good stuff, because Fate (you) will engineer events so that they're taken care of. That's the opposite of the essential nature of a sandbox campaign.
But what happens if they have pitiful gear for their level? Or conversely, have gear that's too good for their level? Well, nothing special happens. It's a sandbox, so you're not matching encounter CR to the party anyway, so having the "right" gear for their level is irrelevant. They will go places they think they can handle with the gear and abilities they have, and run away from situations that are too tough (if they're at all looking out for their necks) – that is how a sandbox handles encounter balance. | **Probably**
If the party is just getting XP rewards without picking up their normal wealth by level treasure, then you're shifting class balance as the party levels up. I'd say a low wealth game disproportionately favors divine casters (since they gain access to *everything* just by leveling up) and really hurts the gear-based characters (a fighter or rogue without the coin for swords with more pluses or things to Use Magic Device on are sad representatives of classes that are already weak in comparison). A poor wizard is a weaker wizard, so if your party had one that was running away with the game, being poor might bring him more in line with the rest of the party.
Really your whole decision process should be asking yourself, "If they had more money, what would they do?" and then act to bring them up to their WBL or not based on whether that sounds like more fun. |
35,362 | Does MSE discourage users to edit new users' or "low quality" posts?
This seems to be a bit counter-intuitive but I'm unable to think otherwise.
So, we know that when a user below 2000 rep makes an edit, they get +2 rep (if it's successful). The edit is successful means it (generally) in some way improved the post. It could the language or the tag or the mathjax, etc. But later when the post gets deleted for whatever reason, the user who made the edit also gets (reverse-compensated? punished?) for making that edit which was found useful.
Despite being above the 2000 rep, for some users like me, it does not feel right that the edits that were made for good/betterment aren't even counted for/recognised when the post gets deleted.
This results in discouraging such users from making edits to newbie questions as their posts are very prone to be deleted. Same goes for those posts which look even somewhat "low-quality".
If there were no reward in the first place or no counter whatsoever perhaps things might have been different and such a thing might not have bothered but they *are* there and it's hard to unsee it and when you do and when that happens it at least pinches and after getting a lot of them it has the above mentioned affect.
So I'm asking if that's what the MSE intends?
Also, just in case this pops up, I think that this is different from getting our rep reversed which was gained from answering "low quality" questions as there I do know that we intend to discourage users from answering such questions and instead flag them or thell them to improve their post. But it's different from the mentioned case as there we need users to improve the post and imo it shouldn't matter whether it is a too big or small.
The only post that I was able to find somewhat related to this is: [Edit on Low Quality Posts](https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/28794/edit-on-low-quality-posts)
(I guess in that only the title seems apt and nothing else really. And irrespective of that, it still kinda proves my point). | 2022/12/18 | [
"https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/35362",
"https://math.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1050858/"
] | Keeping the situation with reputation aside for the moment, just recall that edits are meant to be substantial. From the [Help center](https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit):
>
> **Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged**; try to make the post significantly better when you edit, correcting all problems that you observe.
>
>
>
If the edits made to a new user's post (or a low quality post) still result in the post being deleted, then the edits were wasted. But for suggested edits, in particular, the bar for their approval should be high because the time of reviewers is also spent in evaluating them, which is also wasted. If the loss of 2 reputation points upon deletion of the post teaches what kind of edits are to be avoided, then that is good in my opinion.
See also Journeyman Geek's [answer to "Should/do we discourage edits, by privileged users or not, to off-topic questions that will end up deleted?"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/370262) at Meta SE:
>
> Frankly - my opinion is, if people want to waste their time polishing turds and making silk purses from sow ears and other metaphors, they're welcome to.
>
>
> I would suggest that getting trivial edits/edits to questions that don't belong not being approved, or losing the rep for a suggested edit as posts are deleted might even be part of the learning curve for a new user using suggested edits to learn the ropes of editing. It might feel a bit harsh but that's kinda how the feedback loop is.
>
>
> As an experienced user "it bothers the heck out of me" is a perfectly valid edit reason.
>
>
> | Thank you for your answer @Amplitwist. But the problem persists.
1. Some edits may seem trivial but they are not. Is tag edit trivial? Imo, not at all. It's important and not everyone can do that.
2. It's not really about trivial posts such as [this](https://meta.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/79515) which is mentioned by RiyanM in your link. The edit may not be trivial from an independent perspective or in general but one can say it's trivial simply because the question got deleted. Edit still maybe very useful but the question may still end up being sent to dump. Examples: Converting pic to Latex or tag(s) edit or improving the formatting, grammar and readability of the post or making the heading more meaningful, etc.
3. "Edits are meant to be substantial" - Is prima facie false. I remember making a "substantial edit" only to be later lectured that I'm not allowed to "save" a post! (Of course, then my edit was rollbacked, question was closed and also later deleted. [emoji1](https://emojipedia.org/expressionless-face/) and [emoji2](https://emojipedia.org/unamused-face/)) What I did was that I knew after all my edits, for whatever they are worth, I can't save the question unless the OP provided some working of their own. So, since I was interested and had already tried solving it, I was either stuck myself or saw the point where one could be stuck, I added that working after which the above mentioned happened.
4. There should also be some worth in the edit passing the screening test which is the edit review and it loses out on it's value when we still want the users to learn in an even harsher way by reversing their rep gain. Feedback or the learning part should essentially happen when the edit undergoes the review. Not later again. That's a lot harsher and a lot discouraging.
5. I'm nowhere making a point that trivial edits should be allowed. My point is that the edits which are legit or deemed so, shouldn't ... *fade away*. If at the end of the day a question still gets deleted then it's not necessary that the editor should also be blamed for it as well, especially the case in point, point 3. The editor who did something that added adequate value to something and who did receive a reward for the same or at least an acknowledgment (for >2k rep) that edit was made (and thus counted) this shouldn't be reversed. It does not really makes sense. Such a thing essentially becomes very discouraging. Here's the analogy: The mechanic helps repair the car. The mechanic is paid for their service(s). Some days later, the drives meets with an accident like driving the car into a tree for purely their own mistake. So... we go back to the mechanic and take their service fee back and tell them did not do a good job. This is certainly unfair. |
11,067,690 | There's a project within the Eclipse Foundation, DevTools, which holds a sub-project, SqlTools, which contains a few libraries related to parsing SQL. I'd like to be able to link those libraries to my own project. I just can't for the life of me figure out the right terms to Google to find some repository for those jars.
I've found the source code alright and cloned the git repository but that's source code. I'd like to avoid hosting not only my own project's jars but any dependency it might have. Anyone know where to get these? Already reached out to the mailing list but am impatient. I've finally got free time to hack on the weekend for my own interests... | 2012/06/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11067690",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/178060/"
] | The jars are published in a [p2 repository](http://help.eclipse.org/indigo/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.platform.doc.isv/guide/p2_overview.htm). <http://download.eclipse.org/datatools/updates>
A content.jar file describes the repo, and the actual jars are in <http://download.eclipse.org/datatools/updates/plugins>
There is a nexus instance at <http://maven.eclipse.org/nexus/index.html> that contains some sqltools jars, but publishing jars to maven.eclipse.org is still under construction. | I use mvnrepository.com to search for libraries.
<http://mvnrepository.com/search.html?query=Eclipse> |
11,067,690 | There's a project within the Eclipse Foundation, DevTools, which holds a sub-project, SqlTools, which contains a few libraries related to parsing SQL. I'd like to be able to link those libraries to my own project. I just can't for the life of me figure out the right terms to Google to find some repository for those jars.
I've found the source code alright and cloned the git repository but that's source code. I'd like to avoid hosting not only my own project's jars but any dependency it might have. Anyone know where to get these? Already reached out to the mailing list but am impatient. I've finally got free time to hack on the weekend for my own interests... | 2012/06/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11067690",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/178060/"
] | I use this one - <http://search.maven.org/#browse>
Better look. Clean, slick and more user friendly :) | I use mvnrepository.com to search for libraries.
<http://mvnrepository.com/search.html?query=Eclipse> |
11,067,690 | There's a project within the Eclipse Foundation, DevTools, which holds a sub-project, SqlTools, which contains a few libraries related to parsing SQL. I'd like to be able to link those libraries to my own project. I just can't for the life of me figure out the right terms to Google to find some repository for those jars.
I've found the source code alright and cloned the git repository but that's source code. I'd like to avoid hosting not only my own project's jars but any dependency it might have. Anyone know where to get these? Already reached out to the mailing list but am impatient. I've finally got free time to hack on the weekend for my own interests... | 2012/06/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11067690",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/178060/"
] | The jars are published in a [p2 repository](http://help.eclipse.org/indigo/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.platform.doc.isv/guide/p2_overview.htm). <http://download.eclipse.org/datatools/updates>
A content.jar file describes the repo, and the actual jars are in <http://download.eclipse.org/datatools/updates/plugins>
There is a nexus instance at <http://maven.eclipse.org/nexus/index.html> that contains some sqltools jars, but publishing jars to maven.eclipse.org is still under construction. | I use this one - <http://search.maven.org/#browse>
Better look. Clean, slick and more user friendly :) |
143 | This question: [Why are foursquare tweets not annoying?](https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1439/why-are-foursquare-tweets-not-annoying)
just screams subjective, but not one of the "subjective police" said anything about it.
However, this question: [Is Google Instant good or bad UX?](https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1416/is-google-instant-good-or-bad-ux)
is clearly subjective as well, and it got jumped on by at least one person. Of course, rather than close the question, he just started voting subjective answers down instead.
Two things:
1) Are we allowing subjective questions? If so, then the FAQ needs to be updated.
2) If we are allowing subjective questions, then people should not be downvoting subjective answers just because they are opinions. Disagreeing with the opinion is one thing, but that isn't the case here. He was downvoting EXCLUSIVELY because they were opinions.
I personally believe that we should not be allowing subjective questions at all (not even Community Wiki) and then we won't have these issues. If the argument is that UX isn't always objective, then subjective questions AND answers should be allowed and treated equally and fairly. | 2010/09/15 | [
"https://ux.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/143",
"https://ux.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.meta.stackexchange.com/users/171/"
] | Notice the google questions got 27 answers and 4500 views and a ton of up votes. Plus the question got answered beautifully in a way that helps UX thinkers of every variety.
The audience loves questions like that and the result is very positive. Im sick to death of this argument. Subjectivity is USEFUL on this site for this content. | I don't think there is a "subjective police" nor is there an explicit or necessary rule currently being enforced about subjective questions (the FAQ mentions them, but the FAQ is inherited from StackOverflow and very much in flux as we're in beta - I certainly don't take it as final right now). Since UI is full of topics that can only be discussed by forwarding an expert opinion, it wouldn't make much sense to ban subjective questions.
What we *should* address in the FAQ is how to determine whether specific subjective questions are appropriate for this site. I feel like "why are Foursquare tweets not annoying" is referencing a broader pattern, eg. why do *people* find Foursquare tweets annoying or not, which implies a design trend or expert opinion that can be extrapolated from behaviour or experience. But asking users of the site directly for their opinions on something, such as the Google Instant question, where it basically comes down to people posting answers centered purely around whether they like the new site or not, isn't something I think fits in the model.
Overall, I think StackExchange UI should be about creating knowledge, and just hearing 5 different people tell me about why they like or dislike a site doesn't really add value. You can't boil "creating knowledge" down to a rule in a FAQ. You have to look at it case by case.
Like I said in the Google Instant question, we should continue to ask questions about questions and be critical of each question asked so that we can continue to form (even after the site launches and we have a FAQ) the site. Everyone's feedback is important throughout this process. |
14,568,903 | I've read that in most cases Value Objects shouldn't reference their owners.
a) I interpret this as saying that association should be unidirectional, traversable only from owner to VO?
b) Why shouldn't VOs reference their owners?
thank you | 2013/01/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/14568903",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/437291/"
] | >
> a) I interpret this as saying that association should be
> unidirectional, traversable only from owner to VO?
>
>
>
Yes.
>
> b) Why shouldn't VOs reference their owners?
>
>
>
* Because it isn't needed. Value objects are simple objects and potential behavior in a VO is generally only related to itself or another instance of its own class.
* Because value objects can be contained in multiple owner types, possibly in multiple aggregates.
* Because value object equality is based on all the fields being equal, and you don't want color Green of John's eyes to be considered any different from color Green of Laura's eyes just because of an odd Owner field.
* Because bidirectional associations are discouraged (even in entities) anyway. | It is a code smell for [value objects](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_object) to reference their owners because it suggests a violation of [the SRP](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_responsibility_principle) as well as [overly-tight coupling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_coupling). By definition, a value object is one that does very little other than hold values. Therefore it is immutable and devoid of most logic (business logic, lifecycle logic, etc.). |
14,568,903 | I've read that in most cases Value Objects shouldn't reference their owners.
a) I interpret this as saying that association should be unidirectional, traversable only from owner to VO?
b) Why shouldn't VOs reference their owners?
thank you | 2013/01/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/14568903",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/437291/"
] | >
> a) I interpret this as saying that association should be
> unidirectional, traversable only from owner to VO?
>
>
>
Yes.
>
> b) Why shouldn't VOs reference their owners?
>
>
>
* Because it isn't needed. Value objects are simple objects and potential behavior in a VO is generally only related to itself or another instance of its own class.
* Because value objects can be contained in multiple owner types, possibly in multiple aggregates.
* Because value object equality is based on all the fields being equal, and you don't want color Green of John's eyes to be considered any different from color Green of Laura's eyes just because of an odd Owner field.
* Because bidirectional associations are discouraged (even in entities) anyway. | I follow this principle because I want my POJOs to be designed independent of the client that uses them and decouple it from the client at the code level. That way, they become portable. |
89,535 | I am looking for a control or a method such that I can allow the user to enter the working times of a shop for each weekday on a web page.
For instance, the working time for Wednesday is:
* 06:00 AM to 12:00 AM.
* 05:00 PM to 01:30 AM.
---
**@dan1111's Follow-Up:**
>
> Can there be an arbitrary number of opening times per day?
>
>
>
Yes.
>
> How often will this data need to be entered?
>
>
>
Only once upon shop registration.
>
> by whom?
>
>
>
System Admins. | 2016/01/27 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/89535",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/5840/"
] | If you like graphical solutions you may try something like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2OXrk.png)
Clicking in the stripe below the edit field helps to select the hours without typing them. User may also click and drag, if they like. | Here is my solution to collect working times:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aZD33.png) |
89,535 | I am looking for a control or a method such that I can allow the user to enter the working times of a shop for each weekday on a web page.
For instance, the working time for Wednesday is:
* 06:00 AM to 12:00 AM.
* 05:00 PM to 01:30 AM.
---
**@dan1111's Follow-Up:**
>
> Can there be an arbitrary number of opening times per day?
>
>
>
Yes.
>
> How often will this data need to be entered?
>
>
>
Only once upon shop registration.
>
> by whom?
>
>
>
System Admins. | 2016/01/27 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/89535",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/5840/"
] | How about something where admins can click/drag the hours for each day. You could provide extra feedback of the actual hours selected during this action.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bznJ1.png) | Here is my solution to collect working times:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aZD33.png) |
93,912 | **Situation**
I have [Shield Slam](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/shield-slam-combat---final) and play a sword and board style fighter. If I knock a target prone and I attack with my shield while that target is still prone, can I still [Bull Rush](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Bull-Rush) a prone target? My DM asked me, "How does that work?" We had a discussion with visuals drawn out, and he was sincere in asking that question. The rules (or lack thereof) seem to indicate it is possible, but that doesn't help the logic of it.
**Questions**
1. Are there any rules that we are not aware of that supports Bull Rushing prone targets?
2. Also, I have [Improved Bull Rush](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/improved-bull-rush-combat---final), do I add that bonus to CMB from the feat to my attack roll, since Shield Slam uses an attack roll in place of CMB on the free Bull Rush maneuver? | 2017/01/28 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93912",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/29953/"
] | Yes, you can Bull Rush prone targets, driving them backwards as normal. This is because nothing says it can't.
While you conceive a bull rush as a charge with a shield that is not necessarily the case. Prone doesn't mean lying on the ground - it can mean on hands and knees: if so it is easy to see how a bull rush of kicks and punches could drive someone back. | If you're old enough, watch some of the Showtime series Sparticus. It's not the most *realistic* combat, but neither is Pathfinder so it evens out. There are a few times in the series that characters use shields to bash opponents away, even when they've been knocked down.
Typically, they are leaning on their hands and knees to get up, so you could say that's why it works but, more generally, if you're a Fighter (or similar) with *that* much effort put into shield use, you *find* ways to make what you want work.
**Functionally, you can Bull Rush a Prone target because there is no point in the rules that says you can't**:
[Bull Rush](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Bull-Rush)
>
> You can make a bull rush as a standard action or as part of a charge, in place of the melee attack. You can only bull rush an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. A bull rush attempts to push an opponent straight back without doing any harm. If you do not have the Improved Bull Rush feat, or a similar ability, initiating a bull rush provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
>
>
> If your attack is successful, your target is pushed back 5 feet. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD you can push the target back an additional 5 feet. You can move with the target if you wish but you must have the available movement to do so. If your attack fails, your movement ends in front of the target.
>
>
>
[Prone](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/conditions#TOC-Prone)
>
> The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.
>
>
> Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
>
>
>
Nowhere in Prone does it indicate that you can't inflict other conditions or that they can't be moved (or move for that matter, but that's another question).
**As to whether Improved Shield Bash works, it does not.**
However! Any *attack bonus* to shields (including their -4 AC from being Prone) **does**. And that can be just as good if not better. Taking Weapon Focus(**type** Shield) or investing in a magic shield spike allow you to take a feat that is constantly useful for your build, or spend money to increase your success rate.
Source: From [Shield Slam](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/shield-slam-combat---final)
>
> ..substituting your attack roll for the combat maneuver check...
>
>
>
This indicates that the entire CMB **check** is replaced, not just the die roll. You use your rolled chance to hit instead of any Maneuver bonuses. |
20,817,030 | stb\_image appears to have support for plug-in SIMD implementation(s) of the idct and ycbcr->rgb conversion operations, which take majority of time when loading jpeg files. Looking at the code behind STBI\_SIMD it's pretty clear this code has actually been used somewhere.
However, either the implementations have been proprietary, or my google-fu fails me, as I haven't found any public code that uses this interface.
My needs would be for the x86 platform only (at this time).
Is there any open source that uses this interface? | 2013/12/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/20817030",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1909455/"
] | I remember seeing your question on Twitter, where today coincidently someone mentioned [libjpeg-turbo](http://libjpeg-turbo.virtualgl.org/) licensed under the BSD license. Hope that helps. | It seems to belong to the Horde3D engine (GNU LGPL)
<http://open-projects.net/~shahn/darcs/old/Horde3D_Linux_64bit/Horde3D/Source/Horde3D%20Engine/utImage.cpp>
although I was expecting SSE, SIMD at its purest.. |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | In a technical manual or documentation or anything similar, you wouldn't put emotion into the text. The only reasons to use an exclamation point are to convey strong emotion or a serious warning.
"Your password doesn't meet the criteria" isn't a dangerous situation. There's no need to use anything but a straightforward and calm voice. Just like you would if you were sitting next to someone in person trying to help them set up their app.
I would only use a exclamation point in an error message if there was something very important going on. Either an outright safety issue or the user was about to delete all their data. Unless you're writing an app that's supposed to sound like a person and be all folksy (and please just don't), you wouldn't speak like a person does, with emotion.
The primary purpose of punctuation in messages from an app is readability. Use a period. A period tells the user that your message is now over. Ellipses imply there is more to come, which isn't the case here. | **No**, you don't need an exclamation mark. *Particularly* in English. Nor ellipsis (...) or anything special. It's a simple statement in every sense. In fact, if it's displayed in a standalone box, you could even omit any stop rather than put something unnecessarily flamboyant!!!
Warning! This is an example where it *might* be warranted, but a colon (:) is still better. |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | **No**, you don't need an exclamation mark. *Particularly* in English. Nor ellipsis (...) or anything special. It's a simple statement in every sense. In fact, if it's displayed in a standalone box, you could even omit any stop rather than put something unnecessarily flamboyant!!!
Warning! This is an example where it *might* be warranted, but a colon (:) is still better. | Don't make your program make a mountain out of a molehill
---------------------------------------------------------
If I see a program show an error message with an exclamation mark at the end, I am either going to assume that something is *seriously* wrong, or start doubting the honesty of the message. Ordinary "user did something the program doesn't handle" errors, like the one you are asking about, do not qualify in this category, nor do error messages generated from transient or temporary external conditions. Even an error message that's indicative of the *programmer* having made a boneheaded mistake probably doesn't qualify for an exclamation point; the program-killing results of a [bonehead exception](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ericlippert/2008/09/10/vexing-exceptions/) are emphasis enough.
So, when is using the exclamation point the correct route to take? If your application is returning an error that needs imminent user action to avoid serious consequences (such as data loss, or worse), then my first course of action would be to design the issue out. However, if that's not possible, then such a heavily emphasized error may be appropriate, in conjunction with the strongest iconography that the system provides. Another case where I would end an error message with an exclamation point is in programmer-facing errors where your code has been placed into a truly impossible situation by something that's beyond a normal mistake, but reflects a failure of a fundamental assumption about the world your program is living in. |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | **No**, you don't need an exclamation mark. *Particularly* in English. Nor ellipsis (...) or anything special. It's a simple statement in every sense. In fact, if it's displayed in a standalone box, you could even omit any stop rather than put something unnecessarily flamboyant!!!
Warning! This is an example where it *might* be warranted, but a colon (:) is still better. | I use the blithering idiot test.
Only end an error message with an exclamation mark if the punctuation mark could reasonably be replaced with the phrase "you blithering idiot!"
For example, "this will turn off the life support systems and kill everyone you blithering idiot! Do you wish to continue?" Or "You have entered the wrong password fifteen times in the last ten minutes!"
As an end user, an error message with an exclamation mark feels insulting and so it should only be used in extreme cases. It's ok to use an exclamation mark icon for errors though (c.f. Microsoft Windows). |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | **No**, you don't need an exclamation mark. *Particularly* in English. Nor ellipsis (...) or anything special. It's a simple statement in every sense. In fact, if it's displayed in a standalone box, you could even omit any stop rather than put something unnecessarily flamboyant!!!
Warning! This is an example where it *might* be warranted, but a colon (:) is still better. | I've been a professional programmer for 40 years, I've written everything from operating systems to business app code to games, and I never use an exclamation point in business or OS code. Ever. Nor ellipsis, why would an error or warning message trail off? Or express any emotion? I use periods, just in case multiple messages are emitted; so they won't run together and be confusing.
The only time emotion is appropriate is if the "error" is being delivered by a character or automated narrator within a game as "speech", e.g. "You have no troops in Seattle, General!" |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | In a technical manual or documentation or anything similar, you wouldn't put emotion into the text. The only reasons to use an exclamation point are to convey strong emotion or a serious warning.
"Your password doesn't meet the criteria" isn't a dangerous situation. There's no need to use anything but a straightforward and calm voice. Just like you would if you were sitting next to someone in person trying to help them set up their app.
I would only use a exclamation point in an error message if there was something very important going on. Either an outright safety issue or the user was about to delete all their data. Unless you're writing an app that's supposed to sound like a person and be all folksy (and please just don't), you wouldn't speak like a person does, with emotion.
The primary purpose of punctuation in messages from an app is readability. Use a period. A period tells the user that your message is now over. Ellipses imply there is more to come, which isn't the case here. | Don't make your program make a mountain out of a molehill
---------------------------------------------------------
If I see a program show an error message with an exclamation mark at the end, I am either going to assume that something is *seriously* wrong, or start doubting the honesty of the message. Ordinary "user did something the program doesn't handle" errors, like the one you are asking about, do not qualify in this category, nor do error messages generated from transient or temporary external conditions. Even an error message that's indicative of the *programmer* having made a boneheaded mistake probably doesn't qualify for an exclamation point; the program-killing results of a [bonehead exception](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ericlippert/2008/09/10/vexing-exceptions/) are emphasis enough.
So, when is using the exclamation point the correct route to take? If your application is returning an error that needs imminent user action to avoid serious consequences (such as data loss, or worse), then my first course of action would be to design the issue out. However, if that's not possible, then such a heavily emphasized error may be appropriate, in conjunction with the strongest iconography that the system provides. Another case where I would end an error message with an exclamation point is in programmer-facing errors where your code has been placed into a truly impossible situation by something that's beyond a normal mistake, but reflects a failure of a fundamental assumption about the world your program is living in. |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | In a technical manual or documentation or anything similar, you wouldn't put emotion into the text. The only reasons to use an exclamation point are to convey strong emotion or a serious warning.
"Your password doesn't meet the criteria" isn't a dangerous situation. There's no need to use anything but a straightforward and calm voice. Just like you would if you were sitting next to someone in person trying to help them set up their app.
I would only use a exclamation point in an error message if there was something very important going on. Either an outright safety issue or the user was about to delete all their data. Unless you're writing an app that's supposed to sound like a person and be all folksy (and please just don't), you wouldn't speak like a person does, with emotion.
The primary purpose of punctuation in messages from an app is readability. Use a period. A period tells the user that your message is now over. Ellipses imply there is more to come, which isn't the case here. | I use the blithering idiot test.
Only end an error message with an exclamation mark if the punctuation mark could reasonably be replaced with the phrase "you blithering idiot!"
For example, "this will turn off the life support systems and kill everyone you blithering idiot! Do you wish to continue?" Or "You have entered the wrong password fifteen times in the last ten minutes!"
As an end user, an error message with an exclamation mark feels insulting and so it should only be used in extreme cases. It's ok to use an exclamation mark icon for errors though (c.f. Microsoft Windows). |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | In a technical manual or documentation or anything similar, you wouldn't put emotion into the text. The only reasons to use an exclamation point are to convey strong emotion or a serious warning.
"Your password doesn't meet the criteria" isn't a dangerous situation. There's no need to use anything but a straightforward and calm voice. Just like you would if you were sitting next to someone in person trying to help them set up their app.
I would only use a exclamation point in an error message if there was something very important going on. Either an outright safety issue or the user was about to delete all their data. Unless you're writing an app that's supposed to sound like a person and be all folksy (and please just don't), you wouldn't speak like a person does, with emotion.
The primary purpose of punctuation in messages from an app is readability. Use a period. A period tells the user that your message is now over. Ellipses imply there is more to come, which isn't the case here. | I've been a professional programmer for 40 years, I've written everything from operating systems to business app code to games, and I never use an exclamation point in business or OS code. Ever. Nor ellipsis, why would an error or warning message trail off? Or express any emotion? I use periods, just in case multiple messages are emitted; so they won't run together and be confusing.
The only time emotion is appropriate is if the "error" is being delivered by a character or automated narrator within a game as "speech", e.g. "You have no troops in Seattle, General!" |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | Don't make your program make a mountain out of a molehill
---------------------------------------------------------
If I see a program show an error message with an exclamation mark at the end, I am either going to assume that something is *seriously* wrong, or start doubting the honesty of the message. Ordinary "user did something the program doesn't handle" errors, like the one you are asking about, do not qualify in this category, nor do error messages generated from transient or temporary external conditions. Even an error message that's indicative of the *programmer* having made a boneheaded mistake probably doesn't qualify for an exclamation point; the program-killing results of a [bonehead exception](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ericlippert/2008/09/10/vexing-exceptions/) are emphasis enough.
So, when is using the exclamation point the correct route to take? If your application is returning an error that needs imminent user action to avoid serious consequences (such as data loss, or worse), then my first course of action would be to design the issue out. However, if that's not possible, then such a heavily emphasized error may be appropriate, in conjunction with the strongest iconography that the system provides. Another case where I would end an error message with an exclamation point is in programmer-facing errors where your code has been placed into a truly impossible situation by something that's beyond a normal mistake, but reflects a failure of a fundamental assumption about the world your program is living in. | I use the blithering idiot test.
Only end an error message with an exclamation mark if the punctuation mark could reasonably be replaced with the phrase "you blithering idiot!"
For example, "this will turn off the life support systems and kill everyone you blithering idiot! Do you wish to continue?" Or "You have entered the wrong password fifteen times in the last ten minutes!"
As an end user, an error message with an exclamation mark feels insulting and so it should only be used in extreme cases. It's ok to use an exclamation mark icon for errors though (c.f. Microsoft Windows). |
45,600 | When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
I am writing an application for iPhone and I have some error prompt in my application like "Your password must be 8 character long with alphanumeric characters!" However, I am not completely sold on the idea of putting an exclamation mark (!) on error prompt. Are there situation where it might be warranted, and what about just replacing exclamation marks with dots? Is there a sort of standard among programmers? | 2019/05/31 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/45600",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39306/"
] | Don't make your program make a mountain out of a molehill
---------------------------------------------------------
If I see a program show an error message with an exclamation mark at the end, I am either going to assume that something is *seriously* wrong, or start doubting the honesty of the message. Ordinary "user did something the program doesn't handle" errors, like the one you are asking about, do not qualify in this category, nor do error messages generated from transient or temporary external conditions. Even an error message that's indicative of the *programmer* having made a boneheaded mistake probably doesn't qualify for an exclamation point; the program-killing results of a [bonehead exception](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ericlippert/2008/09/10/vexing-exceptions/) are emphasis enough.
So, when is using the exclamation point the correct route to take? If your application is returning an error that needs imminent user action to avoid serious consequences (such as data loss, or worse), then my first course of action would be to design the issue out. However, if that's not possible, then such a heavily emphasized error may be appropriate, in conjunction with the strongest iconography that the system provides. Another case where I would end an error message with an exclamation point is in programmer-facing errors where your code has been placed into a truly impossible situation by something that's beyond a normal mistake, but reflects a failure of a fundamental assumption about the world your program is living in. | I've been a professional programmer for 40 years, I've written everything from operating systems to business app code to games, and I never use an exclamation point in business or OS code. Ever. Nor ellipsis, why would an error or warning message trail off? Or express any emotion? I use periods, just in case multiple messages are emitted; so they won't run together and be confusing.
The only time emotion is appropriate is if the "error" is being delivered by a character or automated narrator within a game as "speech", e.g. "You have no troops in Seattle, General!" |
722,932 | I'm getting the LNK2005: already defined in (...) error when building my project in Visual Studio 2008. I've referenced other related questions, but mine seems to be a bit more complicated due if nothing else to the number of files I'm working with.
First, I think it will be helpful for me to map out the #include statements I have in the files of my project in the format [current\_file] ->includes\_this\_file
All my header files are guarded with the standard #ifndef [Header] #define [Header] ... #endif.
[Modulator.h]
prototypes for Modulator class
[ChorusUnit.h] ->Modulator.h
prototypes for Chorus classes which have member objects of type Modulator
[AudioHandler.h] ->ChorusUnit.h
prototypes for AudioHandler class which has member objects of Chorus classes
[Chorus.cpp] ->AudioHandler.h
definitions for the members of Modulator and Chorus classes
[AudioHandler.cpp] ->Chorus.cpp
definitions for the members of AudioHandler class
[ChorusUnit.cpp] ->AudioHandler.cpp
the file containing the main() function that actually runs the code of my project.
The ordering of includes is because all the definitions of functions to the classes found in Modulator.h, ChorusUnit.h, and AudioHandler.h need to reference members of the other classes, so I needed the prototypes defined first for all the classes to see each other.
The error specifically says that every single definition found in Chorus.cpp and AudioHandler.cpp in file Chorus.obj is already defined in AudioHandler.obj.
Also there is another set of the same error type that says every single definition found in Chorus.cpp and AudioHandler.cpp in file ChorusUnit.obj is already defined in AudioHandler.obj.
There is probably a pretty straightforward solution, but I am not particularly experience (being mostly a Java programmer) in linking in general. As far as my limited knowledge on the subject goes, I only defined everything once and everything was only included once so I'm personally at a loss as to why these are already defined. Some please enlighten me! | 2009/04/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/722932",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/72401/"
] | The error is probably that you say you #include Chorus.cpp in AudioHandle.cpp - this is not what you probably want.
The reason is, that all .cpp files (unless you've done something special in your IDE) are compiled separately, then linked. When you #include another .cpp file, the file's text is literally included; therefore, all objects defined in the included file appear in the including file as well. When you link the two files, the common objects cause a conflict. | AudioHandler.cpp and ChorusUnit.cpp should only #include header files, not other C++ source files.
The preprocessor inserts the contents of any #included file into the #including file, so you get two copies of the symbols from Chorus.cpp once you start linking: one from compiling Chorus.cpp and the second from compiling AudioHandler.cpp (since it #includes Chorus.cpp). |
722,932 | I'm getting the LNK2005: already defined in (...) error when building my project in Visual Studio 2008. I've referenced other related questions, but mine seems to be a bit more complicated due if nothing else to the number of files I'm working with.
First, I think it will be helpful for me to map out the #include statements I have in the files of my project in the format [current\_file] ->includes\_this\_file
All my header files are guarded with the standard #ifndef [Header] #define [Header] ... #endif.
[Modulator.h]
prototypes for Modulator class
[ChorusUnit.h] ->Modulator.h
prototypes for Chorus classes which have member objects of type Modulator
[AudioHandler.h] ->ChorusUnit.h
prototypes for AudioHandler class which has member objects of Chorus classes
[Chorus.cpp] ->AudioHandler.h
definitions for the members of Modulator and Chorus classes
[AudioHandler.cpp] ->Chorus.cpp
definitions for the members of AudioHandler class
[ChorusUnit.cpp] ->AudioHandler.cpp
the file containing the main() function that actually runs the code of my project.
The ordering of includes is because all the definitions of functions to the classes found in Modulator.h, ChorusUnit.h, and AudioHandler.h need to reference members of the other classes, so I needed the prototypes defined first for all the classes to see each other.
The error specifically says that every single definition found in Chorus.cpp and AudioHandler.cpp in file Chorus.obj is already defined in AudioHandler.obj.
Also there is another set of the same error type that says every single definition found in Chorus.cpp and AudioHandler.cpp in file ChorusUnit.obj is already defined in AudioHandler.obj.
There is probably a pretty straightforward solution, but I am not particularly experience (being mostly a Java programmer) in linking in general. As far as my limited knowledge on the subject goes, I only defined everything once and everything was only included once so I'm personally at a loss as to why these are already defined. Some please enlighten me! | 2009/04/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/722932",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/72401/"
] | The error is probably that you say you #include Chorus.cpp in AudioHandle.cpp - this is not what you probably want.
The reason is, that all .cpp files (unless you've done something special in your IDE) are compiled separately, then linked. When you #include another .cpp file, the file's text is literally included; therefore, all objects defined in the included file appear in the including file as well. When you link the two files, the common objects cause a conflict. | I'm not sure how to do this on Windows machines, but these problems can generally be solved by running the code through the C Preprocessor ONLY. This will result in a combined source file essentially replacing all "#include" statements with the files they refer to. If you view this combined file, it can become obvious where things are being redefined. In Linux/Unix, you would do this using the 'cpp' command. |
722,932 | I'm getting the LNK2005: already defined in (...) error when building my project in Visual Studio 2008. I've referenced other related questions, but mine seems to be a bit more complicated due if nothing else to the number of files I'm working with.
First, I think it will be helpful for me to map out the #include statements I have in the files of my project in the format [current\_file] ->includes\_this\_file
All my header files are guarded with the standard #ifndef [Header] #define [Header] ... #endif.
[Modulator.h]
prototypes for Modulator class
[ChorusUnit.h] ->Modulator.h
prototypes for Chorus classes which have member objects of type Modulator
[AudioHandler.h] ->ChorusUnit.h
prototypes for AudioHandler class which has member objects of Chorus classes
[Chorus.cpp] ->AudioHandler.h
definitions for the members of Modulator and Chorus classes
[AudioHandler.cpp] ->Chorus.cpp
definitions for the members of AudioHandler class
[ChorusUnit.cpp] ->AudioHandler.cpp
the file containing the main() function that actually runs the code of my project.
The ordering of includes is because all the definitions of functions to the classes found in Modulator.h, ChorusUnit.h, and AudioHandler.h need to reference members of the other classes, so I needed the prototypes defined first for all the classes to see each other.
The error specifically says that every single definition found in Chorus.cpp and AudioHandler.cpp in file Chorus.obj is already defined in AudioHandler.obj.
Also there is another set of the same error type that says every single definition found in Chorus.cpp and AudioHandler.cpp in file ChorusUnit.obj is already defined in AudioHandler.obj.
There is probably a pretty straightforward solution, but I am not particularly experience (being mostly a Java programmer) in linking in general. As far as my limited knowledge on the subject goes, I only defined everything once and everything was only included once so I'm personally at a loss as to why these are already defined. Some please enlighten me! | 2009/04/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/722932",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/72401/"
] | AudioHandler.cpp and ChorusUnit.cpp should only #include header files, not other C++ source files.
The preprocessor inserts the contents of any #included file into the #including file, so you get two copies of the symbols from Chorus.cpp once you start linking: one from compiling Chorus.cpp and the second from compiling AudioHandler.cpp (since it #includes Chorus.cpp). | I'm not sure how to do this on Windows machines, but these problems can generally be solved by running the code through the C Preprocessor ONLY. This will result in a combined source file essentially replacing all "#include" statements with the files they refer to. If you view this combined file, it can become obvious where things are being redefined. In Linux/Unix, you would do this using the 'cpp' command. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | How would you plan to distinguish? No one knows everything every philosopher has said or written, and requiring every question to come with a bibliography is a bit ridiculous. Additionally if a truly original question did come up (doubtful) one should be able to give an answer informed by previous philosophical work. No philosophy is an island.
Answers, though, should generally be referenced when they delve into opinion. I would say that original work is still OK, as long as they can point to a paper or something they've written that provides support for their opinion. "It's this way because I said so" is never OK.
On subjectivity:
All you need to do is look at [Programmers](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/) in order to see that this can work. Subjective questions can thrive on StackExchange, and we can even have whole sites devoted to them. It's certainly harder to write a good subjective question than an objective one -- that's why there are [guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) for them. As long as we write good questions, we should be fine. We're going to have to work hard in this department. | On topic.
If we were only to discuss what has been published before this would(or should at least) be a History of philosophy or philosophic literature stack exchange. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | I believe that it is **vitally** important that both questions and answers must contain references to extant philosophical literature. If we entertain any old question, we are refusing to use the ontology of academic science, which means a complete lack of precision in formulating "answerable" questions, and encouraging of a conversational-type site which will be the doom of us. How will attract credentialed experts, Ph. Ds and students of philosophy, if we don't mandate the use of the language they converse with each other in? | "Doing" philosophy? I don't know if I think it's a good idea or a bad idea or a right proper fit for stackexchange; *but I think it is worth trying*, in a way that makes sense given the abilities of stackexchange.
Let's try an experiment and see if we can make collaborative and constructive questions work. I picked the research question "[What is the] Epistemic significance of disagreement [and its] most important papers?][1](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/541/epistemic-significance-of-disagreement-most-important-papers/544#544)".
Here are the reasons I picked this one:
* Easy to follow/analyze/meet demands of the question
* Analysis/synthesis of resources should be straightforward
* Recency and non-general nature of topic should keep data and answers to the "most important" aspect of question pretty limited
I have posted some additional sources. The answer is CW so if anyone with more/better knowledge on the subject than me (esp. in this case... anyone) can come along and re-sort, get rid of extraneous sources.
**The focus here would be to try to answer an unorthodox question collectively; I am envisioning something akin to wikis or pairing up of coders**. Nobody gains rep from helping aggregate data (boo-hoo); but once a good answer is ready to be formed, there will be plenty of source materials and the OP can refer back to the steps the research took (often a more valuable resource than the answer alone). |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | I do not understand the distinction. They way one *does* philosophy is by *discussing* philosophy, whether that discussion be carried out in spoken or written words. (Yes, one can instead think in isolation. But, that is the limiting case of carrying on a discussion with oneself.) | On topic, but with the caveat that the distinction between original and published philosophy is tenuous to the point of being unremarkable. The people posting on this site likely come from cultures that have been in interaction with Western philosophy in some way, and so cannot but pose questions that this tradition either has already responded to or could contribute to in a meaningful way, either as a point of objection or commencement (example: Deleuze, Nietzsche, and Foucault all thought as original thinkers, but all of them are responding to Kant and Hegel). Philosophy is a conversation, not a dogma, no matter what certain academics want it to look like. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | First of all, there is a substantial amount of non-subjective material in the more technical end of philosophy. Programming has "Hurr durr, PHP vs. C++" and philosophy has equivalents. But there are more technical questions that should be answerable without subjectivism and personal opinions. A decent moral philosopher should be able to sketch out the landscape of the dispute between different ethical theories without evangelising their particular view.
Now, is the community viable? If Philosophy Stack Exchange can attract useful contributors like MathOverflow has, that would be useful. If it just becomes a crappy debating forum, not so good. | On topic.
If we were only to discuss what has been published before this would(or should at least) be a History of philosophy or philosophic literature stack exchange. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | I believe that it is **vitally** important that both questions and answers must contain references to extant philosophical literature. If we entertain any old question, we are refusing to use the ontology of academic science, which means a complete lack of precision in formulating "answerable" questions, and encouraging of a conversational-type site which will be the doom of us. How will attract credentialed experts, Ph. Ds and students of philosophy, if we don't mandate the use of the language they converse with each other in? | I don't think that this distinction is necessary for, say, the logical flaws in Pascal's wager. I don't have to refer to a source to point out missing assumptions.
The distinction should be along clear-cut answerable questions and open discussion-y ones, not between book reference questions and others. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | How would you plan to distinguish? No one knows everything every philosopher has said or written, and requiring every question to come with a bibliography is a bit ridiculous. Additionally if a truly original question did come up (doubtful) one should be able to give an answer informed by previous philosophical work. No philosophy is an island.
Answers, though, should generally be referenced when they delve into opinion. I would say that original work is still OK, as long as they can point to a paper or something they've written that provides support for their opinion. "It's this way because I said so" is never OK.
On subjectivity:
All you need to do is look at [Programmers](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/) in order to see that this can work. Subjective questions can thrive on StackExchange, and we can even have whole sites devoted to them. It's certainly harder to write a good subjective question than an objective one -- that's why there are [guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) for them. As long as we write good questions, we should be fine. We're going to have to work hard in this department. | On topic, but with the caveat that the distinction between original and published philosophy is tenuous to the point of being unremarkable. The people posting on this site likely come from cultures that have been in interaction with Western philosophy in some way, and so cannot but pose questions that this tradition either has already responded to or could contribute to in a meaningful way, either as a point of objection or commencement (example: Deleuze, Nietzsche, and Foucault all thought as original thinkers, but all of them are responding to Kant and Hegel). Philosophy is a conversation, not a dogma, no matter what certain academics want it to look like. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | How would you plan to distinguish? No one knows everything every philosopher has said or written, and requiring every question to come with a bibliography is a bit ridiculous. Additionally if a truly original question did come up (doubtful) one should be able to give an answer informed by previous philosophical work. No philosophy is an island.
Answers, though, should generally be referenced when they delve into opinion. I would say that original work is still OK, as long as they can point to a paper or something they've written that provides support for their opinion. "It's this way because I said so" is never OK.
On subjectivity:
All you need to do is look at [Programmers](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/) in order to see that this can work. Subjective questions can thrive on StackExchange, and we can even have whole sites devoted to them. It's certainly harder to write a good subjective question than an objective one -- that's why there are [guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) for them. As long as we write good questions, we should be fine. We're going to have to work hard in this department. | I don't think that this distinction is necessary for, say, the logical flaws in Pascal's wager. I don't have to refer to a source to point out missing assumptions.
The distinction should be along clear-cut answerable questions and open discussion-y ones, not between book reference questions and others. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | I don't think that this distinction is necessary for, say, the logical flaws in Pascal's wager. I don't have to refer to a source to point out missing assumptions.
The distinction should be along clear-cut answerable questions and open discussion-y ones, not between book reference questions and others. | On topic, but with the caveat that the distinction between original and published philosophy is tenuous to the point of being unremarkable. The people posting on this site likely come from cultures that have been in interaction with Western philosophy in some way, and so cannot but pose questions that this tradition either has already responded to or could contribute to in a meaningful way, either as a point of objection or commencement (example: Deleuze, Nietzsche, and Foucault all thought as original thinkers, but all of them are responding to Kant and Hegel). Philosophy is a conversation, not a dogma, no matter what certain academics want it to look like. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | I do not understand the distinction. They way one *does* philosophy is by *discussing* philosophy, whether that discussion be carried out in spoken or written words. (Yes, one can instead think in isolation. But, that is the limiting case of carrying on a discussion with oneself.) | I think this question is premised on a lack of insight into the extent of philosophy. Technically speaking there is no such thing as non-philosophy insofar as every intellectual decision responds to a philosophical problem. Entire cultures are specified by their concession to a series of philosophical responses. How is this so? Because philosophy is essentially meditation on the lack of grounding of all knowledge, that all knowledge takes place in a space of decision without precedent or reference; "everything is subjective" is a bastardized way of putting it, but a way of putting it that creates a distorted reality of its own without proper insight into the history of philosophical discussion in the West. Hence, "everything is subjective" is, to philosophy, as meaningless as "everything is objective". If in everyday life we navigate between ideas we ourselves hold 'subjectively' and ideas accepted as 'objective' the difference is actually one of degree rather than any absolute sense.
In this sense, a stackexchange in philosophy is as good an outlet for discussion as any other insofar as here once can put to question the distinctions and concepts we find ourselves submitting to in work, in love, at home, at school, etc. There should be a place where free discussion is possible. |
5 | I would like to echo [a post that Scott Morrison made on Meta.Tex.SE](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/vote-early-and-often):
>
> I'm a moderator from MathOverflow, and this "question" is actually unsolicited advice, based on our experience from the initial launch of MathOverflow.
>
>
>
> >
> > We should encourage everyone to vote positively as often as possible!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Every Stack Exchange site will eventually end up with a different "base level" of voting --- that is, the expected number of upvotes for a question of a given level of excellence. (This effect occurs because people see a good question, but already with a certain number of votes, and think "oh, I would have upvoted this, but it already has enough".)
>
>
> It's easy for us to affect this "base level" by encouraging high levels of upvoting now. We're setting the standards, and this really will have an effect.
>
>
> (On MathOverflow, we were very active about this early on, specifically encouraging all the initial round of users to vote early and often. You can compare statistics, and see that the average vote total for a MathOverflow question is much higher than on any of the other SE 1.0 sites.)
>
>
> In case it's not obvious: the rationale for wanting this base level to be high is that it provides better positive feedback to good contributors."
>
>
> | 2011/06/07 | [
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15/"
] | How would you plan to distinguish? No one knows everything every philosopher has said or written, and requiring every question to come with a bibliography is a bit ridiculous. Additionally if a truly original question did come up (doubtful) one should be able to give an answer informed by previous philosophical work. No philosophy is an island.
Answers, though, should generally be referenced when they delve into opinion. I would say that original work is still OK, as long as they can point to a paper or something they've written that provides support for their opinion. "It's this way because I said so" is never OK.
On subjectivity:
All you need to do is look at [Programmers](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/) in order to see that this can work. Subjective questions can thrive on StackExchange, and we can even have whole sites devoted to them. It's certainly harder to write a good subjective question than an objective one -- that's why there are [guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) for them. As long as we write good questions, we should be fine. We're going to have to work hard in this department. | I think this question is premised on a lack of insight into the extent of philosophy. Technically speaking there is no such thing as non-philosophy insofar as every intellectual decision responds to a philosophical problem. Entire cultures are specified by their concession to a series of philosophical responses. How is this so? Because philosophy is essentially meditation on the lack of grounding of all knowledge, that all knowledge takes place in a space of decision without precedent or reference; "everything is subjective" is a bastardized way of putting it, but a way of putting it that creates a distorted reality of its own without proper insight into the history of philosophical discussion in the West. Hence, "everything is subjective" is, to philosophy, as meaningless as "everything is objective". If in everyday life we navigate between ideas we ourselves hold 'subjectively' and ideas accepted as 'objective' the difference is actually one of degree rather than any absolute sense.
In this sense, a stackexchange in philosophy is as good an outlet for discussion as any other insofar as here once can put to question the distinctions and concepts we find ourselves submitting to in work, in love, at home, at school, etc. There should be a place where free discussion is possible. |
13,600,247 | My suite was running fine in firefox-16. Updated the firefox version to 17. But my test cases fail throwing the following exception. My selenium webdriver version is 2.26.0. My test suite is in ruby.
Selenium::WebDriver::Error::UnknownError: Cannot find firefox binary in PATH. Make sure firefox is installed. OS appears to be: WIN8
Build info: version: '2.26.0', revision: '18041', time: '2012-11-01 19:33:38'
System info: os.name: 'Windows 8', os.arch: 'amd64', os.version: '6.2', java.version: '1.7.0\_09'
Driver info: driver.version: FirefoxDriver (org.openqa.selenium.WebDriverException).
If I try to run on webdriver 2.25.0, my test suite just hangs in the middle of execution. Kindly help me out. | 2012/11/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/13600247",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1719747/"
] | Downgrade Firefox slightly. The current version of Selenium does not support v17, although looking at the commit changes here, you can see they have fixed it, presumably ready for v2.27:
<https://code.google.com/p/selenium/source/list>
You can download an older version of Firefox from here:
<http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/>
or
<http://www.oldapps.com/firefox.php> | Upgrade to Selenium 2.28.0 and FireFox 17 should be supported. |
12,724,943 | I often read about Nginx and Mongrel being used together. Can someone explain to me how they are different? Why is Mongrel needed? Why is it not advisable to have Nginx directly communicate to the many Rails servers? | 2012/10/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/12724943",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/782220/"
] | Both are web servers, but they do not share the same focus :
* Mongrel is basically a ruby application server that presents an HTTP Interface. It does one thing, taking a request, passing it to your ruby code and serves the answer back in http. It does not handle concurrency, or any performance related feature. One mongrel means there is one ruby process that will handle requests.
* Nginx is a fully featured web server, aimed at performances. It can deliver high performance on static files and can't handle Ruby, Python or any other language in a direct manner. It relies on FastGCI or proxying to other application servers to do that.
To be clear, your rails app by itself isn't directly usable, it needs what you can call a container (I suggest you read some about <http://rack.github.com/>), in this case Mongrel. When you run rails console, it's usually webrick, the most basic web "app" server we have in Ruby (it's part of the standard library).
Then why do we use Nginx in front ? Let's consider we use only Mongrel : we fire a mongrel instance, listening on the port 80. If your requests takes for example 500 ms to complete, you can handle 2 clients per second any nothing more. But wait that's clearly not enough. Let's fire another mongrel instance. But we can't have it listen on the port 80 since it's already used by the first instance and there's nothing we can do about it.
So we need something in front that can handle multiple Mongrel instances, by still listening the port 80. You throw in a Nginx server, that will (proxy) dispatch the requests to your many mongrel instances and you can now add more instances to serve more clients simultaneously.
Back to answering your question, having NGinx communicating to a rails server, means firing one or many Mongrel (or Thin / Unicorn, whatever server is available) and informing NGinx it has to pass the requests to them. It's a popular pattern to host rails services next to using Passenger, which basically provides a way for Apache workers to handle ruby code. | >
> Difference between Nginx and Mongrel
>
>
>
Both are indeed HTTP server, but their focus is different. Mongrel is
a fast HTTP server aimed mostly at Ruby-based applications. it's easily extensible with Ruby code. However, it's not very
good at serving static files, i.e. it's slower than Apache and nginx.
Also, Rails is single threaded, meaning that during the course of a
request (calling a controller method until the actual rendering) the
mongrel is locked.
To work around the above mentioned disadvantages of Mongrel and
Rails, the preferred setup in a production app is to put either
Apache or nginx as the main webserver and if a request for a non-
static Rails page is received, to pass this to a number of underlying
mongrels, let the mongrel hand back the rendered page to Apache/nginx
and serve that page, together with static files such as images/
stylesheets/… It might seem a bit daunting and complex at first, but
once you actually implement it, it's extremely powerful and stable (I
have several apps that have been running for months to years on a
server without a single restart).
It boils down to this, let Apache/nginx do what it's best at, let the
mongrel cluster do what it's best at, everybody is happy.
Choosing nginx over Apache is mostly based on memory considerations.
Apache is quite a hefty webserver, especially if all you actually do
is serve some static files with it and balance the rest over a bunch
of mongrels. Nginx is very lightweight and performant and can do the
same job just as good as Apache. But if you're familiar with Apache,
don't want to get the grips with nginx configuration and have lots of
memory on your server, you can still go for Apache. On a basic VPS,
nginx is a more suitable approach.
for your more information
=========================
Apache vs Nginx
---------------
They're both web servers. They can serve static files but - with the right modules - can also serve dynamic web apps e.g. those written in PHP. Apache is more popular and has more features, Nginx is smaller and faster and has less features.
Neither Apache nor Nginx can serve Rails apps out-of-the-box. To do that you need to use Apache/Nginx in combination with some kind of add-on, described later.
Apache and Nginx can also act as reverse proxies, meaning that they can take an incoming HTTP request and forward it to another server which also speaks HTTP. When that server responds with an HTTP response, Apache/Nginx will forward the response back to the client. You will learn later why this is relevant.
Mongrel vs WEBrick
------------------
Mongrel is a Ruby "application server". In concrete terms this means that Mongrel is an application which:
1. Loads your Rails app inside its own process space.
2. Sets up a TCP socket, allowing it to communicate with the outside world (e.g. the Internet). Mongrel listens for HTTP requests on this socket and passes the request data to the Rails app. The Rails app then returns an object which describes how the HTTP response should look like, and Mongrel takes care of converting it to an actual HTTP response (the actual bytes) and sends it back over the socket.
WEBrick does the same thing. Differences with Mongrel:
* It is written entirely in Ruby. Mongrel is part Ruby part C; mostly Ruby, but its HTTP parser is written in C for performance.
* WEBrick is slower and less robust. It has some known memory leaks and some known HTTP parsing problems.
* WEBrick is usually only used as the default server during development because WEBrick is included in Ruby by default. Mongrel needs to be installed separately. Nobody uses WEBrick in production environments.
Another Ruby application server that falls under the same category is Thin. While it's internally different from both Mongrel and WEBrick it falls under the same category when it comes to usage and its overall role in the server stack. |
148,369 | Is there a word for a (possibly accidental) portmanteau of two synonyms?
For example, say, you contract "liberty" and "freedom" to "liberdom". | 2014/01/28 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/148369",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/8390/"
] | I'm pretty sure there isn't one. Answering in the negative in such cases is fraught (it's not like I can examine every use of English ever and confirm that there is no such word), but *portmanteau* in this sense is relatively recent in itself, is something I come across a fair amount, and the synonym case is a common example.
Quite a few cases of *Franglais* are such portmanteaux, but not all Franglais terms are portmanteaux.
Pretty much all non-accidental cases would be *bastardisations* IME, but not all bastardisations would be portmanteaux, and some may disagree with me.
If there is a term out there for such portmanteaux, it's probably a portmanteau.
If anyone really needed to coin a term for such, I'd suggest "Gladstone Bag", going back to the first coinage's roots to coin the other. | I think we can call it **[a blend](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blend_word#cite_note-7)** by **lexical selection** or a **blend error**. Because this specifically happens when you combine two words that has a semantic similarity (mostly synonyms) rather than phonological similarity.
>
> Blending may occur with an error in lexical selection, the process by which **a speaker uses his semantic knowledge to choose words**. Lewis Carroll's explanation, which gave rise to the use of 'portmanteau' for such combinations, was:
>
>
>
> >
> > *Humpty Dumpty's theory, of two meanings packed into one word like a portmanteau, seems to me the right explanation for all. For instance, take the two words "fuming" and "furious." Make up your mind that you will say both words ... you will say "frumious."*
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> **The errors are based on similarity of meanings, rather than phonological similarities**, and the morphemes or phonemes stay in the same position within the syllable.
>
>
>
---
Also, Wikipedia's "[Speech Error](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_error#cite_note-Eysenck_Keane_2005-6)" article mentions blends as a subcategory of lexical selection errors. (which refers to the book "Cognitive Psychology: A Student's Handbook. Psychology Press")
>
> **Type of speech error:** Blend
>
>
> **Definition:** Blends are a subcategory of lexical selection errors. More than one item is being considered during speech production. Consequently, the two intended items fuse together.
>
>
> **Example:**
>
> *Target:* person/people
>
> *Error:* perple
>
>
>
---
From the book "The Evolving Lexicon *By Andrew Thomas Martin*":
---
From the book "Frames Fields and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization
*edited by Adrienne Lehrer, Eva Feder Kittay, Richard Lehrer*":
---
In a few sources, it is mentioned as **"synonym blend"** as well.
From the book "Slips of the Tongue and Language Production *edited by Anne Cutler*":
---
From the article "Spoken word production: A theory of lexical access" by by WJM Levelt:
 |
580,416 | I have an experiment design with one "within subject" factor and one "between-subject" factor. So I have to use mixed-model ANOVA, but empirical distributions are not approximated by any good family. Thus I have to implement some nonparametric version of ANOVA. The only one is known to me is due to Brunner and Langer[1], with zero hypothesis on equivalence of marginal distrbutions. I would like to compare medians differences and report something related to them as effect size. As far as I understand, after Brunner and Langer ANOVA I should use stochastic dominance posthoc test and the effect size related to it. Thus can't say anything about medians.
Is there any nonparametric version of ANOVA with hypothesis on median?
Could I make some posthoc test on median differences after Brunner and Langer ANOVA?
[1] Brunner E, Domhof S, Langer F (2002). Nonparametric Analysis of longitudinal Data in Factorial Experiments. John Wiley & Sons, New York. | 2022/06/29 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/580416",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/206143/"
] | The usual ANOVA is an OLS regression model that estimates the mean of conditional distributions. The counterpart to OLS that estimates conditional medians is quantile regression for the median, which uses absolute loss instead of square loss to estimate the parameters. If your interest is explicitly in the medians, this seems like a viable path forward. | Quantile regression has been mentioned. Another viable option may be aligned ranks transformation anova (ART anova). It's a nonparametric approach. In some software implementations it can handle fixed and random effects and post-hoc tests. |
2,550,677 | i load a class using
Class.forName(klassname,false,loader)
After this i create an instance using
klass.newInstance();
It returns an object type.I want to cast it to specific type(ie.Klassnamw instance).I used normal casting but it gets hung because it is not resolved during runtime.How can i cast it?Hellp | 2010/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2550677",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/260654/"
] | Casting is usually used to give the *compiler* more information. You don't have that information at compile-time, so you can't give it to the compiler.
Moreover, the point of casting is usually so that you can get to some member of the class which wouldn't be known otherwise - but if you don't know the class until execution time, how can you know the members?
There are certain cases where it would be nice, but they're pretty uncommon. What are you trying to do with the instance after you've created it? If you're trying to call methods which you *do* know about at compile time, can you make those methods part of an interface and cast to the *interface*? | You are using reflection because you do not know (or cannot resolve) the class to be loaded at compile time.
As such, you cannot cast to the class.
Unless there is an interface (or parent class) that you can resolve at compile-time (and thus cast to), you have to use reflection to do anything useful with the object. |
5,927 | In World War II, Executive Order 9066 suspended basic rights of Japanese Americans - even people whose loyalty to the United States was never questioned, though the government feared the group as a whole might contain some spies - and led to a lot of people (>100K) being rounded up and kept at internment camps. *Korematsu v. United States* ruled this was constitutional.
Today, in the "War on Terror," at least one politician can make surprisingly strong statements about plans for negative treatment against large groups of people (e.g. Muslims) because of concerns that a small minority of them might be radical enough to kill a bunch of people, and [the politician can] remain surprisingly popular.
Supposing such a candidate were elected President, could that President do something like Executive Order 9066 again today?
If not, specifically why not, citing what's changed about the US constitution between WWII and now to prevent that?
Answers that just say "no political leader would try that because it'd be so unpopular" are not satisfactory answers to the question and not consistent with the evidence of what happened before and what is happening in present polls. | 2015/12/19 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/5927",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/427/"
] | WWII Supreme Court Cases
========================
During WWII, the Supreme Court dealt with three main issues in their cases on Executive Order 9066: curfews, exclusions, and internment of persons with Japanese ancestry.
In the lesser-known [*Kiyoshi Hirabayashi v. United States*](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/320/81) case, the court had to determine whether imposing a curfew on those of Japanese descent was valid. The main constitutional issue ended up being the effectiveness of the [Fifth Amendment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) in providing for due process of law in times of war. In the end, the court decided that a curfew was indeed justified.
Following this, the majority of the court found in [*Korematsu v. United States*](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/323/214), that the exclusion of those with Japanese ancestry from certain military zones (in this case, the West coast) was also constitutional. In their decision, they heavily relied upon the *Hirabayashi* case.
The question of internment of people with Japanese ancestry was not actually decided constitutionally. Another case, a habeas corpus case, [*Ex parte Endo*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Endo) might have resolved it, but the Court concluded this case in favor of Endo without going to the constitutional level. A day before this decision was announced, the government suspended Executive Order 9066, leaving the question unresolved.
In these cases, Justice Frank Murphy's opinions stand out. In *Hirabayashi*, he sternly warned of the racism involved, but felt that the curfew was indeed justified. However, in *Korematsu*, he evidently felt that the exclusion was without basis and dissented, calling the majority opinion "legalization of racism."
Current Law
===========
In theory, these cases still stand. This is because they haven't been explicitly overruled, and the changes to the constitution since *Hirabayashi* aren't relevant: Amendments XXII and XXV have to do with procedural issues with the office of the President, amendments XXIII, XIV, and XXVI are related to voting rights, and XXVII addresses Congressional salaries. The constitution for the purpose of a similar order is thus unchanged, and so should theoretically be covered under *Korematsu* & *Hirabayashi*.
However, its effective status as precedent is shaky. For one, it has been widely condemned, and courts would likely avoid using *Korematsu* & *Hirabayashi* if possible, or attempt to make a distinction from them given a slightly different order. Second, the convictions against Korematsu and Hirabayashi were overturned in the 1980s based on evidence being possibly concealed by the government. This was [confirmed](https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/confession-error-solicitor-generals-mistakes-during-japanese-american-internment-cases) by the Department of Justice in 2011. However, this is an error of *fact*, and as such the *ratio decidendi* (legal reasoning) used would still technically stand as precedent.
**Lengthy Update:** The Supreme Court has since declared *Korematsu* incorrect in *[Trump v. Hawaii](https://casetext.com/case/trump-v-hawaii-4)*. However in doing so, the court explicitly distinguished the two cases. Thus, many consider the declaration to be *obiter dictum*, i.e. an aside that is non-precedential. I'll quote the relevant portion so that readers may decide for themselves:
>
> Finally, the dissent invokes *Korematsu v. United States*, 323 U.S. 214, 65 S.Ct. 193, 89 L.Ed. 194 (1944). Whatever rhetorical advantage the dissent may see in doing so, *Korematsu* has nothing to do with this case. The forcible relocation of U.S. citizens to concentration camps, solely and explicitly on the basis of race, is objectively unlawful and outside the scope of Presidential authority. But it is wholly inapt to liken that morally repugnant order to a facially neutral policy denying certain foreign nationals the privilege of admission. [...]
>
>
> The dissent's reference to *Korematsu*, however, affords this Court the opportunity to make express what is already obvious: *Korematsu* was gravely wrong the day it was decided, has been overruled in the court of history, and—to be clear—"has no place in law under the Constitution."
>
>
>
Additionally further muddying the issue is that the judgment directly moves from referencing *Korematsu* to referencing concentration camps. But as noted above, *Korematsu* dealt with exclusion, not internment in concentration camps as is often popularly believed (though Murphy's & Roberts's dissents dispute the distinction so the *Trump v. Hawaii* judgment may implicitly be validating this). *Korematsu* paragraph 20:
>
> It is said that we are dealing here with the case of imprisonment of a citizen in a concentration camp solely because of his ancestry, without evidence or inquiry concerning his loyalty and good disposition towards the United States. Our task would be simple, our duty clear, were this a case involving the imprisonment of a loyal citizen in a concentration camp because of racial prejudice. Regardless of the true nature of the assembly and relocation centers—and we deem it unjustifiable to call them concentration camps with all the ugly connotations that term implies—we are dealing specifically with nothing but an exclusion order.
>
>
>
Future Challenges
=================
If another such order occurred, it would almost certainly reach the Supreme Court. The Court would then have to adhere to, reconcile with, or overrule *Korematsu* & *Hirabayashi*. In *Hirabayashi*, the following key piece of reasoning was given (and quoted in *Korematsu*):
>
> Whatever views we may entertain regarding the loyalty to this country of the citizens of Japanese ancestry, we cannot reject as unfounded the judgment of the military authorities and of Congress that there were disloyal members of that population, whose number and strength could not be precisely and quickly ascertained. We cannot say that the war-making branches of the Government did not have ground for believing that in a critical hour such persons could not readily be isolated and separately dealt with, and constituted a menace to the national defense and safety, which demanded that prompt and adequate measures be taken to guard against it.
>
>
>
Regardless of personal beliefs, it is hard to argue the logic behind this particular statement (mainly because it is so broad, in my opinion). However, these "prompt and adequate measures" would still have to be weighed against the Fifth Amendment. Additionally, we now have a historical example of what may happen if race-based exclusion were allowed, and this could inform the justices' decision.
A completely different way that such an order could be ruled unconstitutional could be through separation of powers violations. It could be ruled that Congress [cannot constitutionally delegate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondelegation_doctrine#United_States) the powers expressed in Executive Order 9066, but this is rare. It was mentioned in *Hirabayashi*, but the court did not consider this issue, saying that since Congress agreed with the order, this point was moot.
Conclusion
==========
Though the letter of the law suggests that another order like Executive Order 9066 is possible, in practice it would face significant hurdles. Such an order would likely face challenges based on the Fifth Amendment and almost certainly make its way to SCOTUS. Then, it would be up to them to decide.
I'll end with this [quote](http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/scalia_korematsu_was_wrong_but_you_are_kidding_yourself_if_you_think_it_won) from the late Justice Antonin Scalia:
>
> Well, of course, *Korematsu* was wrong [...] But you are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again.
>
>
> | **Yes, it could,** and folks around the new Trump administration are just barely more than a week after the election [citing the internment camps as precedent](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/11/17/japanese-internment-is-precedent-for-national-muslim-registry-prominent-trump-backer-says/?tid=pm_national_pop) in support of actions against Muslims in the United States. Supreme Court justices may be even be appointed and confirmed in advance of any challenge to a modern version of such an order, so they're on the bench and ready to again affirm its own previous decision. |
71,639 | Some of the best bread makers often work with a secret ingredient - e.g. a yeast starter that has been passed down for generations.
Jesus told his disciples to beware of the “(ζύμης) yeast of the Pharisees” - i.e. their teachings (Matt. 16:6, 11; Mark 8:15; Luke 12:1). The conventional interpretation is that the symbolism Jesus meant is that of yeast used in bread.
However, yeast starters are also used in [beer](https://www.whatwouldjesusbrew.beer/faq/is-beer-mentioned-in-the-bible/) and wine making. For example, Christian blessings of wine being crushed at harvest time have included bottles of wine (with residual yeast) from previous vintages being poured into the juice of newly pressed grapes going into fermentation vats. Indeed, without good yeast used in wine making the resulting beverage fermented from wild yeasts can sometimes be toxic - resulting in headaches and even causing health problems.
Are there any Bible commentaries that broaden the scope & analogy of Jesus' reference to yeast to include more than just yeast used in bread making? If not, how do we know the Jesus was just thinking about just bread yeast in his teaching about the Pharisees?
For example, with wild yeasts in wine making, there a chance that things can go really bad or really good in the fermentation process. With the Pharisees and other leaders (Sadducees) there were some good teachings, but also some pretty wild teachings that resulted in sour grape outcomes.
Likewise today, one might argue, that there is a tendency in even mainstream religious institutions & leaders to have teachings that are pretty wild. As a result, an argument can be made that this has yielded a sour (i.e. hyper critical) skeptical or unbalanced graceless legalistic approach to the Christian faith.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uzQJD.jpg) | 2021/12/05 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/71639",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/44608/"
] | Look at the full context. It clearly states the leaven of bread.
>
> When the disciples reached the other side, they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6 Jesus said to them, “Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 7 And they began discussing it among themselves, saying, “We brought no bread.” 8 But Jesus, aware of this, said, “O you of little faith, why are you discussing among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? 9 Do you not yet perceive? Do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 10 Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 11 How is it that you fail to understand that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12 Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of **the leaven of bread** [τῆς ζύμης ⸂τῶν ἄρτων], but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
> (Matt 16:5–12, ESV)
>
>
>
Yeast related to brewing is not mentioned in Windisch, H. (1964–). ζύμη, ζυμόω, ἄζυμος. G. Kittel, G. W. Bromiley, & G. Friedrich (Eds.), *Theological dictionary of the New Testament* (electronic ed., Vol. 2, p. 902). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. This book discusses the etymology of Greek words as used in the New Testament. | Generally speaking Jesus used a number of physical necessities for life to represent and parallel with "spiritual" necessities for life.The foremost among these were bread and water. Food and drink. Everyone knows physical animals need food and drink to survive and live in the physical world and Jesus used these basic human staples of bread and water as metaphors for the equivalent necessities for life in the spiritual.
EG:
>
> John 6:35 I am the bread of life,” Jesus told them. “No one who comes
> to Me will ever be hungry, and no one who believes in Me will ever be
> thirsty again.
>
>
>
There are countless other scriptural referrences for bread and water I can make here too many to list but essentially its about "spiritual sustanance". The base essentials required to survive.
Jesus also uses several references to "leven" and "yeast" which speaks explicitly about the "expanding" properties that are kind of unique to bread and similar food products. How it makes bread grow much larger and rise higher. He links leven expanding in bread with seeds growing into large trees in the parables given in Matthew 13:32.
EG:
>
> The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that a man planted in his
> field. although it is the smallest of all seeds, yet it grows into the
> largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the
> air come and nest in its branches. He told them still another parable:
> “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and mixed into
> three measures of flour, until all of it was leavened.”
>
>
>
My understanding is in both cases that the "seeds" and "yeast" is basically used metaphorically for "teaching" or "principles". Gods teaching and principles may start out and seem very small. But if you "plant" them or "mix" them into yourself it will cause huge expansion because they are life giving. That small seed grows into a giant tree and the measure of dough will expand significantly into large serving of bread. Similar sentiments are expressed in his feeding of the 5000 and 4000 where he takes small quantities of bread and expands them into huge quantities to feed large crowds.
So based on the parables Jesus used and the context in which Jesus spoke I believe he used the "Yeast" or "leven" symbology specifically in relationship with his parable of the bread. The "Yeast" of the pharisees is there "teaching", "principles" and "actions" which did not align with Gods. Specifically he said the pharisees yeast was "Hypocracy". They did not practice what they preached and so there bread did not expand and grow the bread like the yeast of God.
>
> Then they understood that He was not telling them to beware of the
> leaven used in bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and
> Sadducees
>
>
> Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
>
>
> Mat23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers
> of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be
> careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do,
> for they do not practice what they preach.
>
>
>
You have also mentioned wine and Jesus did also use the metaphor/parable of "wine" extensively but my understanding it was never linked to Yeast. His use of wine is more linked with the transformation process of sacrifice. The "Crushing" and fermentation to turn it into something more "potent". (Similar to the metaphor of "oil" production). It involves "Sacrifice" and often painful and difficult transformation of the original substances. Some of the meaning of this was more self evident at the time because the people were closer and more involved in the production process for these substances. They stomped the grapes to produce wine, the crushed the olives to produce olive oil and they ripped the bark off the trees to produce the resin used in Frankincense. I'm not aware of any parables where yeast is explicitly used in relationship to wine or beer so I do not see this as applicable. |
71,639 | Some of the best bread makers often work with a secret ingredient - e.g. a yeast starter that has been passed down for generations.
Jesus told his disciples to beware of the “(ζύμης) yeast of the Pharisees” - i.e. their teachings (Matt. 16:6, 11; Mark 8:15; Luke 12:1). The conventional interpretation is that the symbolism Jesus meant is that of yeast used in bread.
However, yeast starters are also used in [beer](https://www.whatwouldjesusbrew.beer/faq/is-beer-mentioned-in-the-bible/) and wine making. For example, Christian blessings of wine being crushed at harvest time have included bottles of wine (with residual yeast) from previous vintages being poured into the juice of newly pressed grapes going into fermentation vats. Indeed, without good yeast used in wine making the resulting beverage fermented from wild yeasts can sometimes be toxic - resulting in headaches and even causing health problems.
Are there any Bible commentaries that broaden the scope & analogy of Jesus' reference to yeast to include more than just yeast used in bread making? If not, how do we know the Jesus was just thinking about just bread yeast in his teaching about the Pharisees?
For example, with wild yeasts in wine making, there a chance that things can go really bad or really good in the fermentation process. With the Pharisees and other leaders (Sadducees) there were some good teachings, but also some pretty wild teachings that resulted in sour grape outcomes.
Likewise today, one might argue, that there is a tendency in even mainstream religious institutions & leaders to have teachings that are pretty wild. As a result, an argument can be made that this has yielded a sour (i.e. hyper critical) skeptical or unbalanced graceless legalistic approach to the Christian faith.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uzQJD.jpg) | 2021/12/05 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/71639",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/44608/"
] | Generally speaking Jesus used a number of physical necessities for life to represent and parallel with "spiritual" necessities for life.The foremost among these were bread and water. Food and drink. Everyone knows physical animals need food and drink to survive and live in the physical world and Jesus used these basic human staples of bread and water as metaphors for the equivalent necessities for life in the spiritual.
EG:
>
> John 6:35 I am the bread of life,” Jesus told them. “No one who comes
> to Me will ever be hungry, and no one who believes in Me will ever be
> thirsty again.
>
>
>
There are countless other scriptural referrences for bread and water I can make here too many to list but essentially its about "spiritual sustanance". The base essentials required to survive.
Jesus also uses several references to "leven" and "yeast" which speaks explicitly about the "expanding" properties that are kind of unique to bread and similar food products. How it makes bread grow much larger and rise higher. He links leven expanding in bread with seeds growing into large trees in the parables given in Matthew 13:32.
EG:
>
> The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that a man planted in his
> field. although it is the smallest of all seeds, yet it grows into the
> largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the
> air come and nest in its branches. He told them still another parable:
> “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and mixed into
> three measures of flour, until all of it was leavened.”
>
>
>
My understanding is in both cases that the "seeds" and "yeast" is basically used metaphorically for "teaching" or "principles". Gods teaching and principles may start out and seem very small. But if you "plant" them or "mix" them into yourself it will cause huge expansion because they are life giving. That small seed grows into a giant tree and the measure of dough will expand significantly into large serving of bread. Similar sentiments are expressed in his feeding of the 5000 and 4000 where he takes small quantities of bread and expands them into huge quantities to feed large crowds.
So based on the parables Jesus used and the context in which Jesus spoke I believe he used the "Yeast" or "leven" symbology specifically in relationship with his parable of the bread. The "Yeast" of the pharisees is there "teaching", "principles" and "actions" which did not align with Gods. Specifically he said the pharisees yeast was "Hypocracy". They did not practice what they preached and so there bread did not expand and grow the bread like the yeast of God.
>
> Then they understood that He was not telling them to beware of the
> leaven used in bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and
> Sadducees
>
>
> Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
>
>
> Mat23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers
> of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be
> careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do,
> for they do not practice what they preach.
>
>
>
You have also mentioned wine and Jesus did also use the metaphor/parable of "wine" extensively but my understanding it was never linked to Yeast. His use of wine is more linked with the transformation process of sacrifice. The "Crushing" and fermentation to turn it into something more "potent". (Similar to the metaphor of "oil" production). It involves "Sacrifice" and often painful and difficult transformation of the original substances. Some of the meaning of this was more self evident at the time because the people were closer and more involved in the production process for these substances. They stomped the grapes to produce wine, the crushed the olives to produce olive oil and they ripped the bark off the trees to produce the resin used in Frankincense. I'm not aware of any parables where yeast is explicitly used in relationship to wine or beer so I do not see this as applicable. | The yeast Jesus refers to is any yeast stored in the home, because he's making an analogy to the passover in Exodus:
>
> Exodus 12:12 “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every
> firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all
> the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord. 13The blood will be a sign for you
> on the houses where you are, and when I see the blood, I will pass
> over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.
>
>
> 14“This is a day you are to commemorate; for the generations to come
> you shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord—a lasting ordinance.
> 15For seven days you are to eat bread made without yeast. On the first
> day remove the yeast from your houses, for whoever eats anything with
> yeast in it from the first day through the seventh must be cut off
> from Israel.
>
>
>
Essentially the absence of yeast in the homes of Israelites was an sign of acceptance of God's forgiveness. Each Israelite had a choice: continue doing as you normally do (make bread with yeast), or stop and change their behaviour to obey God.
The Pharisees were given the same choice with Jesus' teaching: continue following their own invented rules and regulations, or listen to Jesus, repent and accept forgiveness. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.