On Wednesday, December 08, 2004, at 05:24PM, Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com> wrote: >--- Matthew Klahn <mklahn at mac.com> wrote: > >> Tongue-in-Cheek Disclaimer: I'm not a search engine, nor do I play one >> on TV. Usage of resources like urbandictionary.com, dict.org and >> google.com is highly recommended to everyone. > >I wouldn't have thought to look at urbandictionary.com, which I >think of as a source for gangster and faux-gangster slang--but >obviously there's more there. In a nutshell, the reason I asked >instead of searching is that I was guessing it was limited to a >pretty small group, whose Web presence I don't know my way >around, and thus would be hard for me to find. No problem. I didn't mean anything by what I said; just feeling snarky, I guess. urbandictionary is actually quite a nice little resource, much like wikipedia (which, I'll admit, I didn't even think of consulting). While a lot of definitions are quite useless, the good ones usually float to the top, and at least give you an idea of what a term means. It does lack nuance and efficiency, though; you might have to read 10-12 entries to get a real idea of what a term means. I think that at some point, editors could come through and collapse a bunch of the entries for a particular term into a single, efficient entry. Matthew Klahn