“It doesn’t have to be a huge event to make a difference, Jones said. “Any kind of activity-related event that can include a fundraising component can be directed toward charity.”
12813
The American convention in quotations is (typically) to place punctuation inside quoted text. But I always run into situations where the punctuation of the quote interferes with the punctuation of the sentence. How would you punctuate this (American, non technical)?     When my friends ask, "What do you want for your birthday?", I never know how to respond.   It seems odd to place the last comma outside the quote simply because of the question mark. Is that the preferred (i.e. most often accepted) standard?
65919
In an English language textbook for Italian middle school students, there is a reading exercise where students have to fill in the gaps. Here is a completed excerpt     The International Red Cross/Red Crescent is a global charity and humanitarian organisation. It believes that people everywhere have a right to life and health. …blah, blah, blah… The Red Cross / Red Crescent began its work in 1863. Today, it operates in 186 countries and every year it gives help to about 250 million people.    My two private students had to write a paragraph about a charitable institution of their own choice. We came up with 1. Médecins Sans Frontières (in Italian Medici Senza Frontiere) which is also known as Doctors Without Borders 2.  and 3. Amnesty International. They each chose an institution and they all started their paragraphs with the definite article "the" just like in the textbook.         The Doctors Without Borders is a global charity and humanitarian…   The Greenpeace is a global charity and pacific organisation…      I crossed out the articles and said they weren't needed. Samuele asked me why–good for him–but I didn't know what to say, so I promised I would look into it.  While I can explain that the definite article is needed when we mention the  because it is a collection of states/nations, and it is omitted when it is shortened to UNICEF. I don't know why the article is needed for the  but not for  or .   I'm also aware that if the name of a company or band starts with "The" e.g. The Beatles,  The Leathersellers’ Company, and The Body Shop  the article is always obligatory and always capitalised. However, the charity's name used in the book name is , and yet the article is needed.    Is there a reason? Why is the definite article necessary in the International Red Cross, but not for Greenpeace or Amnesty International?
101661
Just read a couple MSO posts about editing guidelines, after seeing  getting rejected.  I had stumbled upon an old question that somehow made it onto the front page, and saw a great answer there. The question was about "understanding events and event handlers in C#", and the answer was great but there was further information in the comments.  So I started editing the post; I found that "if we create a delegate void MyDelegate(object sender, EventArgs e)" was clearer if the backtick encompassed the delegate word, so I moved it.  A commenter was asking "How is the event fired?", and the answerer replied with a comment instead of editing his answer, so I added a code snippet to give an example of how the event would be fired.  Then I noticed the code block actually included two parts that really belonged in two separate classes (the one where the event is created, and the one where the event is registered/handled), so I split the definition and the consumption of the event into two code blocks. That made it much clearer what belonged where, even though there weren't any classes involved (didn't add any).  And then I added the part why I actually wanted to edit the post in the first place: I added the shorthand notation for registering events: myObj.SomethingHappened += HandleSomethingHappened;. I left the full notation in place.  And lastly I added a line of code to show how a handler could be unregistered with -=.  As the first reviewer approved the edit, I thought to myself "hmm this last paragraph I added to introduce the -= really just restates the previous one from the original author" - shortly after that, my edit was rejected by 3 reviewers in a row.  The reason was "This edit is incorrect or an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post." -- really? Is this how constructive edits are being welcomed? Have I introduced bad code that's just plain wrong? I mean, I use the shorthand notation all the time, I know it's correct. The -= part was just added for the sake of completeness, and the backtick would have been too minor of an edit. Reordering the code snippets and splitting them in two distinct blocks really improves the post I find, but someone who just glanced at the diff could think I removed the event handler snippet, when I merely cut it &amp; pasted it below the event registration code.  So I'm guessing the redundant paragraph killed it? Should I submit another edit, minus that paragraph? Actually I don't even care, it's a question from 2009 with almost 60K views and the answer is great enough as it is to have received 155 upvotes (plus mine), and if people don't know they don't need to new up the delegate to register the event then they can just buy ReSharper and have the tool teach them it's redundant. And if they want to unregister a handler then they can certainly find how to do that somewhere else. And maybe I should be doing something else to kill my spare time than browsing SO and upvoting good questions and answers, downvoting and flagging bad ones, and improve the few posts I can contribute to with the few things I do know. I mean, I intended to genuinely improve an excellent post, it's a bit (quite) irritating to read it's an "incorrect" edit.  I take the [Reject] edits that change an answer's explanation or code, with a supposedly "better" alternative. Even if the proposed solution is better, it should be added as a comment, or a separate answer. guideline as what caused my edit to be rejected. Point is, I was adding information to the answer, not changing or replacing anything.  So, was this edit legit? If I understand  correctly, my edit should have been rejected for changing too much of the post, not for being incorrect or an attempt to comment on the answer. And if Servy's MSO answer is still right, it means I should have posted my content as a brand new answer... to a question that's like 4 years old? , but I find it would have been better to just edit the post, given that "Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it."  Sorry for the long post.
112076
Often times someone will tell a long winded story, and then someone will reply with something like "So basically you just had a bad day."  Another, I think better example is when someone will talk a lot about existentialism, and then someone else will reply with "So basically 'to be or not to be, that is the question.'"  Or another example, someone will talk about Cuban-American relations after the cold war, and someone will reply with "So basically America plugged their ears and pretended Cuba didn't exist."  I don't think the word 'oversimplify' is good enough, because it can actually increase the importance of something. For example "So basically if you don't recycle, everyone will die of global warming."
34200
"That extra effort is what gives traditional media its added oomph—typically 10-100 times that of a plain-vanilla email campaign"   This sentence is used in below paragraph:          They work because, to your prospect, it's a given that you've put in more effort. (A printed sales pack costs you more to put together; a telephone call takes 100% of one person's attention for its duration.) That extra effort is what gives traditional media its added oomph—typically 10-100 times that of a plain-vanilla email campaign.      I think that it means: extra effort can make the media more appealing. But the next part of the sentence is ambiguous  for me:    typically 10-100 times that of a plain-vanilla email campaign
99347
With the new Change Data Capture tool coming out soon, why would someone use this over Platform Events? My understanding is that CDC utilizes Platform Events under the hood anyways.
20769
Like when you want to say that you'll tell a short version of something which would alter the accuracy of the original version.  I was thinking of "In a nutshell" and "To make a long story short", but I felt like those phrases did not place emphasis on the "there might be an insignificant loss of accuracy" aspect.
48435
There are many examples of this, and I'd like to give a few:   A person who puts a lot of effort to help the community and earns reputation points. But that reputation is the motivation behind helping the community, not because they really want to. A student approaches a professor, and helps them in their teaching and doing research in order to have a good LOR (letter of recommendation). To a SEO, the content of the website must be good (well, this one is a little tricky, but you get the spirit.)   I'm not saying that the reputation/LOR/high-ranked is not deserved. It is. I just want to focus more on the selfish reason(s) behind that.  Any kind of answer can be accepted: single word, phrase, proverb or idiom.
74300
I love that concept whenever any company comes up with it as a part of their marketing campaign but not sure what do we call such action.   The action starts with one tiny thing (say striking a small metal ball) and it hits another thing that swings further and does some action. The beauty continues and finally a big gate may open showing some message/greetings. So, a small tiny ball to a giant gate everything happens kinetically.    and  are two videos showing the action which is brilliantly crafted. I know the word '' but I've always used, heard and seen the phrase in a different context. Even the dictionary uses an example that does not fit to my concern.
40721
I have conducted 2 tests for my event study.  One is the parametric T test which rejected the null hypothesis, and my returns on event day is very significant.  However, I have conducts the non-parametric rank test. No matter using event window 1 day to 20 days, I couldn’t reject any null hypothesis. My return on the event day is way higher than the rest of the days, still it cannot reject the null hypothesis  Does anyone know what could affect on this? I have tested the normality, it is not normally distributed.  EDIT: @jbowman @EdM The event study deals with announcement returns of a large M&amp;A transaction in the US. Data for the returns was obtained from Thomson Reuters. Assuming the data to be normally distributed I started using the market model and t-test. For the market returns I use the S&amp;P 500 index. I use different event windows to see if for example, insider trading occurs before the event date. My estimation window is 220 days, event window in the largest specification 41 days.  The non-parametric rank test is the Corrado test, based on his paper from 1989 (see link below). I use this test since it is easily implemented in Excel, and it was recommended by my finance lecture as check for parametric tests. In the Corrado test abnormal returns obtained from the market model are ranked and compared to the average return.  On the announcement date I have large abnormal returns (31%) that are highly statistically significant at the 1% level (t-value 16.4). The abnormal return on the event date is ranked 1st, however for the announcement date I only obtain a p-value of 8%. Therefore, I wonder why a return ranked first, is not significant at conventional levels. I have checked my calculation multiple times, and do not think i have made an error. The file provided by my university shows similar results for announcement returns of another company, that has large abnormal returns on the announcement date. If I extend the event window, with multiple extreme returns occurring after another, the rank test becomes significant.  Corrado (1989):
69222
Is it might help? Is there something else that whould make it better?
104822
Is there a commercial service offered to general public that allows you to celebrate the new year several times?  The idea is that you would celebrate it in a time-zone and than move to the next one arriving there before new year. Of course this is relatively easy to accomplish by yourself if you're near the border of a country and you just move to the next one in a different time zone. Things probably get a bit more complex to do it 3 or more times.
87210
US 501(c)3 Private Foundations are typically controlled by the primary donator, so that is a nice perk, but in exchange for that perk I realize the tax deductions for donating are significantly lowered than for charities. Aside from being lower, the tax code doesn't recognize appreciated property and only allows for a deduction based on the donating taxpayer's cost-basis: ie. the price they paid for the property no matter its current market value.  When there is a significant delta of price paid vs current redeemable value, it seems this can still be a perk for the donating taxpayer in some circumstances, such as with lottery tickets that are known winners already.  If the donating taxpayer pays $1 for the ticket. Their cost basis is $1. If the ticket is now worth $100,000,000 but has not been redeemed, is it accurate that the donating taxpayer can donate this to their private foundation for a deduction at cost basis, and the private foundation can redeem the $100,000,000 ticket completely exempt from all lottery withholding income taxes?   (Other taxes unique to private foundations are known and outside the scope of this question.)  Most literature I can find is about appreciated marketable securities, and occasionally real estate. It doesn't seem that the tax code specifies any distinction between property, but it also doesn't seem the answer to this question is part of the general collective conscious even if it really is that obvious if my understanding is already correct.
13267
I think some good words would be conflicted, or confused. As an example of context, think of someone who believes in freedom of speech, but, at the same time, they would support banning comedians who make jokes about certain issues that person cares about.
123963
My 16 year old wants to give her teachers Christmas gifts. She is in 10th grade, so there are quite a number of teachers.  As a retired teacher, I do not think teachers need gifts. I would have loved a card or note with a comment or appreciative remarks. I taught special needs students and liked when a parent made snack for the entire class or contributed to the trip fund, but I never needed them to spend their hard-earned money on me.  I suggested my kid make cards -- she is very artistic, and add a heartfelt message. She disagrees and wants twenty dollar gift cards, which for the record, she cannot contribute to.  We are trying to find a compromise. I think that over $100 is ridiculous. It is also too much to 'lend' my kid.   (Deep background, this is not my own daughter but my godchild. When her parents died, I became her guardian. She was 4 when they died. So sometimes she uses that as her trump card. Teens aren't 'easy'.)  I said I'd ask what others think.
16684
Does anyone have experience using Platform Events between separate orgs? I'm having trouble finding documentation or mention that something like this is possible. Basically I'd like to define a set of events that partnered companies can subscribe to so they can track our fulfillment process. Typically someone might set up web services or Connections as an integration solution, but I don't like how Connections couples our schema together. Web Services would require developer expertise than I'd like to compel them to pay for. A set of domain specific events is much more re-usable and less likely to change, than an object definition. In our use case of multiple integrated partners it would allow a given org to make changes without requiring a Connection change for every other org Connected to that object.  If it's not possible using more conventional Salesforce tooling, I know I could use a separate middleman pub/sub solution with Platform events, but I'd like to minimize moving parts.   Any info someone might have on the subject would be greatly appreciated!
28639
In response to the long-term measures recommended by the School Board,   the then Principal initiated the Pledge Day on “Clean LA", to encourage   all schools to make the “Clean LA” commitment on that day.   I wonder if it sounds better to replace the to-infinitive clause with a participle clause:      In response to the long-term measures recommended by the School Board,   the then Principal initiated the Pledge Day on “Clean LA", encouraging   all schools to make the “Clean LA” commitment on that day.   because I think it is seldom to use to-infinitive clauses after a comma.