Comments on: Just Curious … https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/ Truth Will Prevail Mon, 06 Aug 2018 17:29:28 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8 By: Grasshopper https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12371 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12371 You’ve *got* to make sure “special” is in there somewhere. :-P

]]>
By: clarkgoble https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12372 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12372 I was shocked the other day when I came here and saw the saying as “the most socialist…” and was about to say something until I noticed it was computer generated.

]]>
By: Renee https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12373 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12373 Well, I never noticed until this post. For now it is the most “servile, yet rhadamanthine”. I’ll have to consult m-w.com for the meaning on the latter.

]]>
By: Kaimi https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12374 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12374 Well, I should admit that the idea of a revolving theme, using javascript’s random selector, was borrowed from a now-defunct blog (not affiliated with T & S, but one I sometimes read) called Tainted Law, (it was at http://www.306taint.us ; he had a few dozen whole-sentence themes that alternated).

A very early iteration of our theme here had only a single adjective. (The adjective list was originally only 20-30 words long). The list grew rapidly, and we briefly experimented with putting two adjectives in two different sentences (all within the first 24 hours of setting up the blog); the group overwhelmingly preferred the one-sentence, two-adjective setup, which has remained ever since about day 2 of the blog’s existence.

As far as favorites, I particularly like “seaworthy,” because it usually has nothing to do with the other adjective. “Uplifting, yet seaworthy” makes me chuckle.

I also like it when the first adjective is very self-righteous or pompous sounding and then the second adjective is ridiculous or silly. “Wise, yet long-winded” or “acclaimed, yet incomprehensible” are a few favorites that I have seen.

]]>
By: Gordon Smith https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12375 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12375 Kaimi: And whose idea was the phrase “onymous Mormon group blog”?

]]>
By: Kaimi https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12376 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12376 That phrase was mine, as I recall. I thought that, with enough qualifiers, we could claim to be the most ___ Mormon group blog, with practically any adjective, since we were almost the only Mormon group blog.

But the Met. Elders were another. So “onymous” went in to distinguish us (the onymous blog) from them (the anonymous blog).

Since we are the only onymous Mormon group blog, we can claim to be the most uplifting, influential, incomprehensible, or whatever, and it’s probably correct.

(I had to look up “onymous” in the dictionary. My original intuition was that the opposite of anonymous would be “nonymous” (drop the “a” like “amoral”). But it actually turns out to be “onymous.”).

]]>
By: Grasshopper https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12377 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12377 Today’s favorite: imperious, yet hide-bound

]]>
By: Clark Goble https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12378 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12378 “Quite possibly the most Kaldor-Hicks efficient, yet soporific, onymous Mormon group blog in history.”

I had to look up Kaldor-Hicks as it sounded like some bad villain from an Edgar Rice Burroughs book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaldor-Hicks_efficiency

Kind of funny given the extended discussion of consecration the last week.

]]>
By: Kaimi https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12379 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12379 Every time I see gemeinschaftliche, it reminds me of my Sociology 101 course, years ago. That was the last time I had to think about gemeinschaft. I also still recall the mnemonic I used to remember the term —

A community of people, living in a mine shaft.

]]>
By: Kristine https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12380 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12380 And how did you remember Gesellschaft?

]]>
By: Jan https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12381 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12381 My favorite: platonic, yet crass

]]>
By: Kaimi https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12382 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12382 Kristine: I never did think of a good menmonic for gesellschaft. I tried to connect it to Gazelle in some way, but I couldn’t think of one that worked. So, in the end, I mostly remembered it as “the one that isn’t gemeinschaft” which worked out as long as I remembered gemeinschaft.

(Being a non-speaker of German, my most pressing problem — after getting to know the two words — was keeping their meanings apart. Mine-shaft technology worked well for that)

]]>
By: Kristine https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12383 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12383 Kaimi: this is really a stretch, especially if you aren’t conversant with German, but “Gesellschaft” contains both “Esel” (donkey) and “Schaf” (sheep). Donkeys and sheep can trade and conduct commerce, but aren’t likely to form true communities.

(Yeah, yeah, I know it’s weak, but those of us with completely useless degrees in German have to feel clever sometimes :) )

]]>
By: Kaimi https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12384 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12384 I just got “Rawlsian, yet Cartesian.” That’s an interesting combination.

Hmm. If I were behind a veil of ignorance, I would want to arrange things so I could say “I think, therefore I am.” How’s that for Rawlsian, yet Cartesian?

]]>
By: Aaron Brown https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/just-curious/#comment-12385 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=242#comment-12385 My reaction to the description of the blog, not only initially, but everytime I read it, is to become too distracted by the word “onymous” to even notice the other adjectives. I mean, maybe I’m just horribly unsophisticated, but does anybody really ever use the word “onymous”? At first glance, it looks like a really bad misspelling of “anonymous,” and raises serious doubts about the literacy of the blog’s participants.

Fortunately, reading the very inciteful posts usually dispels my doubts pretty quickly.

]]>