Senator Mike Pencil announced today that the Florida State Senate passed legislation...  *Edit: It's a specific example that I don't see an answer for in another post.
644
He will understand that I was not joking.   He will understand I was not joking.  Which of the sentences is correct? Are there any specific rules about the use of &quot;that&quot; in the sentences I reported as example?
1839
It's    that posting links to your own website is ok, but should there be a line drawn? There were several spam flags today for 's recent posts, presumably because they all link to his website. Initially I disagreed because his answers seem for the most part relevant to the question, but then I looked into it more and realized there's three things that set this apart from most of the related cases that have come up:   This isn't an occasional thing -- he's posted  in the last year This isn't a random blog he writes for a fun, it's a for-profit company he  and makes money promoting I'm not willing to go through all 412, but from the sample I checked, he generally doesn't mention that the products he's recommending are his own. The site is linked from his profile, but most people aren't going to check that   Is all this considered acceptable use, or are the spam flags accurate?
115467
DoubleAA (a mod for over a year) seems to have to vote extra times to undelete a post.          Shouldn't it just say his name once?  Week has passed and five more have been added... this is getting out of control!
22606
I was reviewing Low Quality Posts today and saw this message. Is this something new?     This post doesn't cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
19058
Post-split, Meta's moderators are (we've been told) the CMs and maybe a few other employees.  And, sure enough, those folks have diamonds.  However, something's missing:    Where are all the moderators??  Also, while I'm here, see the underlined text -- I know it's boilerplate, but since Meta doesn't have elections, you might want to change that.  (Lest you say that per-site metas have that text too, at least their associated sites have elections.  Lest you say that betas don't have elections, at least they can aspire to do so in the future.)
18909
@Valorum said     ...not to mention the sheer strain that comes from continually using the Force at an advanced age.   To my feeble mind, this doesn't make sense. Approaching 900 years old, Yoda is still as strong as any whippersnapper in terms of Force power and usage. Despite his old age, Obi Wan shouldn't have any problems with using his Force powers.  This got me to thinking, does the Force begin to leave you as you age? Is it a flow of Force power that goes down based on (I hate to say this) a decrease in midichlorian count as you approach your expiration date?
13342
There seems to be a lot of candidate attrition right at the beginning of the primary voting (over 10% in a few hours time).  The faded text is distracting in an already long page.  If we have to have them on the page, can we at least sort them to the bottom of the page?
14592
I saw a 1 character  and wondered why; apparently it was after my (less-comprehensive) answer was accepted, to allow the check-mark to be transferred to the higher voted answer (written by the asker) after giving himself a Populist badge.  I think that self-answers should be ineligible for the Populist badge.
112264
I'm looking at , which was closed as off-topic a few days ago. Just a few minutes ago, the OP radically revised it; it doesn't even resemble the original question anymore. In fact, the two versions only share about seven words and some punctuation. Here's a screenshot of the most recent revision:    So, the question for the community is this: Is this proper, or should it be rolled back?  Edit: I went ahead and rolled it back because it has a couple of answers already (responding to the old version). But I would still like to know the community consensus on this.
109096
.  A diamond moderator rolled back a question to a state where it had .  This effectively recreated the tag, despite it being blacklisted.  This should not happen, and is .
104438
So I noticed that many cards with tap-effects ship with a clause specifying that they can only be used on untapped permanents, such as  and .  So here's my question:   Doesn't that imply that, given the right situation, one can legally tap an already tapped permanent?   I'll give an example of the kinda scenarios this is relevant for: Can  activate her first ability when no untapped cards are around? Or, thinking untap-effects, could I bounce a forest with  even when there isn't a tapped creature available?  Notice that, unlike the previous batch of examples, the wording on these lacks the clause restricting their use to un/tapped permanents - does that mean that they aren't?  Any kind of clarification would be greatly appreciated here.
92727
asked me to report this (apparent) bug.  When he tried to protect  question someone (or something) stole the question's protection, which has since been missing:          The question shows no sign of having the protection removed, thus I believe it was abducted. I am sure justice will be done, and this poor question will receive the protection it deserves.     I recommend interrogating the  that was said to have announced this question to the world, I bet it would have some useful information.
9762
While doing some flagging (yes, I'm a little bit addicted) I stumbled upon the user . At first the case seemed clear, Spammer, but...and that's a big one, he seems to be a productive member of SU and SO (his account on SF isn't there anymore, but it's still in the Data-Dump of the explorer, not sure what happened).  He does never seem to link against StarWind-Software, except with his name and profile. He also  that he's a developer there...so...at what am I looking here? I can't really place him somewhere.
4903
That's my problem: Can every triangle be divided into five isosceles triangles?  I've got to give evidence why this is true or not true...  (sorry for possible language mistakes - I'm from Germany)  Thanks in advance  Markus
18067
I came across  and at the time there were no suggested answers. After reading Mark Hubbart's comment (at the time with four upvotes), which was the correct answer, and seeing that it had been over 30 minutes since his comment, I figured I would provide that answer in my own words, which I did. My answer is longer, and I think more rounded and more useful, but the core of the answer came from the comment. I have no idea if I'd have thought up the answer on my own--a definite maybe to that.  Now had I tried to be "honorable" or something, such as instead of answering, suggesting to the commenter that he make his comment an answer, I would only have accomplished giving away easy rep to some other user not as into gratuitous self-denial.  The commenter had merely to enter his comment into an answer box instead of a comment box! It was his choice! Whether he was too lazy or didn't think his answer worthwhile or some other reason is not my responsibility. Must I bend over backward to help him earn points that he so carelessly left lying around for another person to take? It just took a tiny bit of non-laziness on my part to get my text typed into the box that would reward me instead of the box that wouldn't.  If my perspective is incorrect and the community would rather see such answers-as-comments rewarded and supported, I will gladly accept that. In the meantime, I just want to shake off the tiny bit of guilt my overly-nice and overly-concerned-with-propriety self is feeling. :)
75127
Today a moderator :    But the daily limit is 40. Is it just moderators who can do this? And why are they allowed to review 20 more?  I have checked , but it does not mention anything about reviewing more tasks.  Or is Bill special ;).
83583
This is related to .  Bill the Lizard informed us that mods know who flagged a post, but does this include them?  If a mod gets flagged, do they get to see who flagged them?  Not that any of these wonderful mods would ever think of doing anything untoward, but you never know.  Bill might suddenly lose his mind one day and, if I have to flag him, madness plus "modness" could equal mayhem.