Moderation Questions
Moderation Questions
8
zs

Moderation Questions

The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa

30 January 2024 at 05:27 AM
Reply...

24444 Replies

8
zs


by chillrob m

I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone say "at the bit", but from reading the phrase I've always thought it was "champing", and I know that was the original use of the phrase. Since that word has ceased to be used apart from in that phrase, I guess people have been using "chomping" more recently.I don't know why anyone would want to continue the use of the phrase at all, as most p

Dog looks like she has plenty of personality.

I'm no horseman, but I would expect a lot of people to know what a bit is. It's a general horse riding thing. It isn't unique to racing.


I'm literally chomping-at-the-bit to post this:

Is it chomping at the bit or champing at the bit? Technically, both are correct, but they have different histories. While champing at the bit came first, chomping at the bit has also been in the linguistic mix for over a century and is widely accepted today.

The meaning of this idiom is to highlight the impatience of someone. Champing (or chomping) at the bit was first used to explain the imagery of a restless horse grinding its teeth against its bit (part of the bridle) when being held under control. Fast forward to today, the expression highlights a person’s impatience to get something done or to get moving.

Idioms are words or phrases that have literal origins, but over time, they’ve taken on a more figurative meaning. They are excellent ways to improve your grammar through analogy and metaphor, and their use indicates a connection between a literal event and a modern context to add detail and interest to your sentences.

@crossnerd
@d2_e4


I already answered that question correctly


Very skeptical of the claim that all idioms are literal in origin.


by Crossnerd m

I already answered that question correctly

I know.

That's why I tagged you.


by Luckbox Inc m

Very skeptical of the claim that all idioms are literal in origin.

I suspect your skepticism is justified. That said, it might be true that the vast majority of idioms are literal in origin.


by Luckbox Inc m

Very skeptical of the claim that all idioms are literal in origin.

I was wondering about this as well. What is the literal origin of the following:

--Beat around the bush
--Sitting on the fence
--Tempest in a teapot
--Under the weather
--By the skin of your teeth
--give someone the cold shoulder
--grease someone's palm
--head over heels


by Rococo m

I was wondering about this as well. What is the literal origin of the following:

--Beat around the bush
--Sitting on the fence
--Tempest in a teapot
--Under the weather
--By the skin of your teeth
--give someone the cold shoulder
--grease someone's palm
--head over heels

I wouldn't be surprised if ALL of those idioms have a literal origin.

I'll research the first three in your list.


Re "Beat around the bush"

https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/beat...

The figurative meaning of the odd phrase ‘beat around the bush’ or, as it is usually expressed in the UK, ‘beat about the bush’, evolved from the earlier literal meaning. In bird hunts some of the participants roused the birds by beating the bushes and enabling others, to use a much later phrase, to ‘cut to the chase‘ and catch the quarry in nets. So ‘beating about the bush’ was the preamble to the main event, which was the capturing of the birds. Of course, grouse hunting and other forms of hunt still use beaters today.


My quickie 'research' into "sitting on the fence" suggests that it does NOT have a literal origin.

addendum: Ditto for "tempest in a teapot."


by biggerboat m

Just popped in to say the correct word is "chomping".

biggerboat, you are correct. I assume anyone who disagrees with you is culturally and possibly morally bankrupt.


That is a very cute dog you have in your avatar chillrob.


Champing at the bit is a gross euphemism for a horse trying to escape the clutches of an abusive human and being misinterpreted as being excited.

How about we put a bit on the horseback rider and see how they like it.



“Head over heels” is a funny one that inverted itself over time in popular usage. Because standing normally is technically head over heels. The original literal was “heels over head.”


by whatthejish m

The original literal was “heels over head.”

But was that actually literal?


by Didace m

But was that actually literal?

Yes, like tumbling around and somersaulting. Literally having your heels over your head.


I know "balls to the wall" has an actual aviation/navy use. I always wondered why a lot of older people would say "with all get-out"


by spaceman Bryce m

biggerboat, you are correct. I assume anyone who disagrees with you is culturally and possibly morally bankrupt.

Biggerboat has been thoroughly refuted re chomp vs champ.


by geezerchess m

Biggerboat has been thoroughly refuted re chomp vs champ.

When I was a kid me and my friends played a lot of nintendo games, mario has a famous character called chomp chomp, and pokemon has garchomp and I spent many hours collecting and taking care of my tomagotchis and pokemon, and that is the core reason im here, I was a prodigious pokemon card player and then later magic the gathering and then poker. granted there is a machamp but it is the evolved form of machoke and that seems uneccessarily violent not a fan.


by geezerchess m

Biggerboat has been thoroughly refuted re chomp vs champ.

Not at all


by King Spew m

You can man-splain your own ban upon your return.

Here, I'll help.

Troll baiting that got someone else banned should have the same penalty.

Geezer said he would "mansplain" his temp ban if asked about it. I asked about it. I suspect if not me somebody else would have. I had no agenda when asking. I had no expectations of what he may say. I certainly didn't anticipate his getting banned again. I was curious what he had to say because I too was banned for the same offense. This is the moderation thread and this was a question regarding a moderation issue. In the past the Moderation thread was a place where we could talk about Moderation issues without the threat of retaliation. Is this not the case anymore?

I understand that Misogyny is against the rules in this forum. Is Misandry(the hatred, contempt, or prejudice against boys or men) also against the rules?

Thank you!


Oh good it’s back


I’m not a misandrist, but even if I were, comparing that to misogyny is a false symmetry as women lack the institutional power to oppress.


by Luckbox Inc m

Not at all

Of course he has. The receipts have been provided. If BiggerBoat can shoot them down, he's welcome to fire away.


by mongidig m

Geezer said he would "mansplain" his temp ban if asked about it. I asked about it. I suspect if not me somebody else would have. I had no agenda when asking. I had no expectations of what he may say. I certainly didn't anticipate his getting banned again. I was curious what he had to say because I too was banned for the same offense. This is the moderation thread and this was a

Apparently not.

Reply...